MASTER 
NEGA  TIVE 
NO.  91-80189 


MICROFILIVIED  1991 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES/NEW  YORK 


44 


as  part  of  the 
Foundations  of  Western  Civilization  Preservation  Project" 


Funded  by  the 
NATION.AJL  ENDOWMENT  FOR  THE  HUMANITIES 


Reproductions  may  not  be  made  without  permission  from 

Columbia  University  Library 


COPYRIGHT  STATEMENT 

The  copyright  law  of  the  United  States  -  Title  17,  United 
States  Code  --  concerns  the  making  of  photocopies  or  other 
reproductions  of  copyrighted  material... 

Columbia  University  Library  reserves  the  right  to  refuse  to 
accept  a  copy  order  if,  in  its  judgement,  fulfillment  of  the  order 
would  involve  violation  of  the  copyright  law. 


AUTHOR: 


DE  VRIES,  WILLIAM 
LEVERING 


TITLE: 


EHOPOIIA:  A 

RHETORICAL  STUDY 


PL  A  CE : 


BALTIMORE 


DA  TE : 


1892 


Reslricliuns  on  I'si- 


LOHJMIHA  UNlVl'lvSirV  LlBRARIliS 
PRESERVATION  DRl'ARTMRNr 

BIULIOCRAriilC  MlCROl  OHM  1  ARGIi  1 


Oiieuial  Maleiiai  as  I'ilmed  -  lixiiiiliiu  Dxbiiauraijhic  Ketuid 


(J  O  u  ►  v> 


1^^ 


Deviies,  William  Levering .j    1865-1937- 

l-jiin|inihi.       A    rhrtui'ieal    >Iial\-    of    the    ivnos    d!'   riiar- 
a^'h-r  111  thf  ni-alinn-  nf  l.x'sia-  ...      Baitiiii^»r'a  -L  \Iii!'j>hy 

48  p      23^"*. 

Thesis  (ph.  d.)— Johns  Hopkins  university. 
Bibhography:  p.   i7i 


1 


!':i(i:jH 


4^-34437 


Library  of  Congress 


Master  Negative  # 


J  ,.  ■ 


FILM    sizi-:;      3J:> />in^' 


-,7^ 


■Il'CliNiCAL  MiCROFOKM  DATA 


RHDUCllON      RATIO 


IMAGE  PLACIIMHNT:    lA -..iLW  IB     IIB 

DATE      FILMIiD: ^   ^  ^...^jZ'SAA.ni  INITIALS    j/^:j,  ^, 

FILMED  BY:    RliSl^ARCI  I  PUBLICATIONS,  INC   WOODBRIUGF,  CT 


/// 


_XE 


Association  for  Information  and  Image  Management 

1100  Wayne  Avenue.  Suite  1100 
Silver  Spring,  Maryland  20910 

301/587-8202 


Centimeter 

1  2         3 


IL 


iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 


Ml 


Inches 


1 


5         6         7         8 

mmjiiiiiiiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiii 


¥h 


9      10     n 

inliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiii 


IT  I 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


IT  I 


— 

y6    112 

|63 

iL. 


36 


■^ 


1.4 


2.5 


2.2 


2.0 


1.8 


1.6 


12       13       14 

iiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiili 


15    mm 


TTT 


MM 


MfiNUFflCTURED    TO   flllM   STflNDflRDS 
BY   APPLIED    IMAGE,     INC. 


"« t  4't"i?:  '•.>'j^''i 


ETHOT 


X 


A 


hi/ 


^ir 


,  ,~i( 


9S 


T^T\ 


V 


1 


.^/. 


Hr 


^/,f■ 


bVA"*"^^ 


\    1 


(■\^- 


\\iTlS    \jT\\\^^ 


■it 


"CI. -' 


p^?^ 


>-hr 


^  ■,  -<^- 


- ,  k^.^  t  Ao-  1  ,•; 


V  ^' 


(  K 


'I 


^l:T 


„^. 


.^VC. 


-^' 


-A    -_  '  ■" 


1 


<^ 


It 


^1 


II 


J 


■ 


.  t 
(  m 


/■^.!      ' 


!l 


'f     ' 


Rx- 


■Ar^' 


*»  * 

it 

» t 

I.  %  : 
«  .  •  «J 
1* 

f-|' 
■  t  >« 
g»( 

NIH 

Ci  t^ 

nil 

II  |1 

II  fl 

tin 


I 


tV;    -i^- 

.— , 

_ 

',V;  ,  '- 

7  .•'■  '■• 

i 

u- 

N  .  - 

■"■-*> 

■r^^^^^-'^-^^-J^'^V. 


tr-' 


i     .'-;:'' 


iiTORICAL  STUDY  OF  THE  TYPES  ui   UiiAR- 
ACTER  !\  THE  ORATIONS  OF  I.YSIAS 


By  WILLIAM  LEVERING  DEVRIES,  A.  B. 

Fellow  in  Johns  Hopkins  University 


DISSERTATION  ACCEPTED  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR 
OF  PHILOSOPHY  IN  THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNI- 
VERSITY, FEBRUARY,  1892 


r  i  M  0  H  E 


U  H  ^:     M  U  R  P  H  Y    &    C 


,'S; 


». 


1*^ 


I 


f    -> 


TO  MY  TEACHERS 


BASIL  L.  GILDEKSLEEVE,  Ph.  D. 
HENKY  AUGUSTUS  COIT,  D.  D. 


WILLIAM  WAED  CRANE. 


CO 


148784 


ifreiS^  \6yov  ^vvajxis  rvyxdvei  ypvxo.yf^y'^c-  otaa,  rhv  fxiWovra  prjropiKbv  ^(recrdai 

Plato,  Phaedrus,  271  D. 

KpdrKTTOS  yap   5^  ttolvtwv   iytviro  ^T^r6pa>v  cpixTtv  avOpunrcav   KaroTrrevaai,   koI  rii 
vpocr-fiKOvra  fKacrrots  ciTro^ovvai,  "rrdQ-q  re  koI  i^drj  Kot  (pya. 

Dionysius  Hal.,  de  Lysia  Judic,  c.  7. 


CONTENTS. 


I.  Ethopoiia: 

1.  Definition  of  Ethopoiia, 

2.  Ethos,  

3.  Distinction  between  to  TrpcVov  and  rjdoTroua, 

4.  Relation  of  ivapyaa  to  rjOoTTOua,         .  -  -  - 

5.  Place  of  Ethopoiia  in  the  Category  of  Figures, 

6.  Practical  Value  of  Ethopoiia  in  Oratory, 

II.  Lysias'  Use  of  Ethopoiia  : 

1.  Dionysius  on  the  Ethopoiia  of  Lysias,       .         -         - 

2.  Francken  on  the  Ethopoiia  of  Lysias, 

3.  Influence  of  Ethopoiia  on  Lysias'  Style, 

III.  The  Types  of  Character  in  the  Orations  of  Lysias  : 

A.  Plan  of  this  Study, 

B.  The  Study  of  the  Types,  

1.  The  Patriotic  Man  :  Orations  7, 16, 17, 19,  21,  25,  26,  31, 

2.  The  Simple  Man :  Orations  1, 13,  32,  and  7, 16, 19,  21, 

3.  The  Clever  Man :  Orations  10,  24,  30, 

4.  The  Man  of  Low  Birth :  Orations  13,  23,  30,  and  1,  24, 

5.  The  Immoral  Man:  Orations  1,  3,  4, 

6.  The  Young  Man:  Orations  18, and  16, 19, 

7.  The  Women  of  Lysias :  Orations  1,  32, 


Page. 

9 
9 
11 
11 
12 
12 


14 
15 
16 


17 
18 
18 
29 
34 
42 
42 
44 
46 


BIBLIOGRAPHY. 


The  authorities  and  editions  chiefly  used  in  preparing  this  dissertation  are  the 
following. 

General  Works. 

1.  Aristotle.    Rhetoric.    Edition  of  Cope  and  Sandys.    3  vols.    Cambridge,  1877. 

2.  Blass,  Fr.     Die  Attische  Beredsamkeit.    Vol.  I.     Ed.  2.     Teubner,  Leipsic, 

1887.    This  volume  is  the  one  quoted, — according  to  the  pages  of  edi- 
tion 2. 

3.  Dionysii  Halicarnassensis  Operum  Volumen  Quintum.     Curavit  I.  I.  Reiske. 

Leipsic,  1775.     Ars  Rhetorica;  De  Lysia  Judicium;  De  Isaeo  Judicium. 

4.  Emesti,  J.  C.  T.    Lexicon  Technologiae  Graecorum  Rhetoricae.     Leipsic, 

1795. 

5.  Jebb,  R.  C.    The  Attic  Orators  from  Antiphon  to  Jsaeos.    2  vols.     J^ondon, 

1876.     Vol.  J.  is  that  quoted  in  this  dissertation. 

6.  Spengel,  L.     Rhetores  Graeci.     3  vols.     Leipsic,  Teubner,  1853-6. 

7.  Volkmann,  R.    Die  Rhetorik  der  Griechen  u.  Romer.    Ed.  2.    Leipsic,  1885. 

8.  Walz,  C.   Rhetores  Graeci.  9  vols.  Stuttgart,  Tubingen,  London,  Paris,  1832-6. 


Special  Works  on  Lysla^s. 

1.  Berbig,  F.     Genus  Tenue  Dicendi  in  Lysiae  Orationibus.     Ciistrin,  1871. 

2.  Francken,  C.  M.     Commentationes  Lysiacae.    Utrecht,  1865. 

3.  Frohberger,  H.     Ausgewiihlte  Reden  des  Lysias.     Jn  3  parts.     Part  J.,  ed. 

2  revised  by  Gustav  Gebauer.     Leipsic,  1868-80.     The  text  of  this  edi- 
tion when  available  has  been  used  with  rare  exceptions. 

4.  Morawski,  Dr.  von.     Bemerkungen  zu  den  Attischen  Rednern,  in  Zeitschrift 

fiir  die  Oesterreichischen  Gymnasien,  Vol.  30.  403,  1879. 

5.  Rauchenstein,  R.    Ausgewiihlte  Reden  des  Lysias.    Revised  by  Fuhr.    Berlin, 

1883. 

6.  Scheibe,  C.    Lysiae  Orationes.    Ed.  2.    Teubner,  J^eipsic,  1882.    This  edition 

has  been  used  for  statistics. 


Ethopoiia. 

Definition  of  Ethopoiia. 

Ethopoiia  is  dramatic  delineation  of  character,  especially  as  dis- 
played in  speeches  written  for  court  by  a  logographer,  who  has 
studied  and  depicted  in  the  thought,  language  and  synthesis '  of  the 
oration,  the  personality  of  the  client  who  deliyers  the  speech.  It 
differs  from  irpoawTToiroda,  or  personification,  in  that  the  latter  is 
the  feigned  speech  of  an  absent  party,  or  of  an  inanimate  object 
treated  as  a  person.^  The  Archidamus  of  Isocrates  is  an  example 
of  TTpoacDTToiToua.  elScoXoiroda,  on  the  other  hand,  is  dramatic 
representation  of  the  dead,  as  an  example  of  which  Aeschines,  in 
Ctesiphontem,  §  153,  may  be  cited.  Or,  following  Aphthonius,^  we 
may  define  7)6o7Toua  as  the  portrayal  of  the  character  of  a  known 
and  Hying  being,  elBcoXoiroUa  as  the  dramatic  representation  of  a 
known  but  dead  person,  and  Trpoo-wTroTroua  as  the  personification  of 
a  person  or  object  entirely  fictitious  and  non-existent.  Such  are  the 
distinctions  made  by  the  later  rhetoricians,  but  Trpoa-coitoiToua  and 
rjOoTroda  appear  to  haye  been  fully  synonymous  in  earlier  times. 
fiifMr]a-i<^,  I^atin  imitatio,  figuratio,  expressio,  is  another  word  often 
used  as  synonymous  with  7)6o7roua,  but  it  is  a  more  comprehensiye 
term.  The  later  rhetoricians  haye  mentioned  this  subject  frequently 
in  their  yarious  works,  and  Ernesti,  in  his  Lexicon  Technologiae,  has 
giyen  a  yery  good  resume  of  their  yiews,  under  the  w^ords  'qOoiroda, 
?}^09,  fjLi/jLrjai<;,  kt\. 

Ethos. 

The  nature  of  ethos  is  discussed  in  cap.  11.2  ff.  of  the  treatise  en- 
titled Ars  Ehetorica  in  the  corpus  of  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus.* 

^  This  word  is  used  in  the  sense  in  which  it  is  employed  by  the  Greek  rhetori- 
cians, ?.  e.,  as  referring  to  the  structure  of  the  period  and  of  the  sentence. 

«  Of.  Longinus,  ap.  Walz,  IX.  543.  »  Q.  Walz,  I.  101. 

*  It  must  not  be  overlooked  that  in  his  rhetorical  works  Dionysius  is  not  an  origi- 
nal authority ;  he  gathers  together  the  views  and  results  of  a  long  line  of  professed 

9 


10 


Elhopolia, 


The  statements  there  made  may  be  summed  up  as  follows :  There 
are  two  classes  of  ethos,  the  universal  and  the  particular.  The  sphere 
of  the  former  is  philosophy  ;  of  the  latter,  oratory.  In  the  first  case^ 
it  impels  to  virtue  and  deters  from  evil,  while  in  the  case  of  oratory 
i  it  is  the  means  by  which  the  speech  is  adapted  to  the  speaker,  the 
hearers,  the  opponent,  the  subject,  and  other  circumstances.  This 
I  oratorical  ethos  involves  six  points,  the  race,  family,  age,  principles, 
lot,  and  pursuits  of  the  person.  Furthermore,  the  race  may  be  sub- 
divided, for  the  ethos  w^ill  vary  according  as  the  subject  is  Greek  or 
foreigner,  or  again,  as  he  is  Athenian,  B(eotian,  or  Spartan,  or  Scyth- 
laii,  Celt,  or  Egyptian.  The  foreigner  will  speak  differently  from 
the  Greek,  and  among  the  Greeks  the  Athenian  will  not  speak  like 
the  Spartan.  Again,  in  the  matter  of  family  it  is  important  to  what 
race  or  tribe  the  father  and  mother  belong.  Age  is  the  third  point, 
for  voun<r  men  and  old  do  not  speak  in  the  same  way,  for  their 
characters  differ.  The  former  are  more,  the  latter  are  less  spirited. 
Similar  differences  are  to  be  expected  when  you  spciik  of  a  brother, 
a  wife,  a  husband,  or  a  son.  Fourthly,  in  the  matter  of  a  man's 
nature,  \vc  must  consider  whether  he  is  affectionate,  or  harsh,-  or 
austere,  or  covetous.  Further,  as  to  a  man's  lot  or  fortime,  we 
must  note  whether  he  is  successful  or  not.  These  things  to  be  sure 
are  not  ethic,  but  they  profoundly  aifect  a  man's  life.  Lastly,  we 
uiiL-t  take  into  consideration  the  profession  or  pursuits  of  the  sub- 
ject. For  the  soldier,  physician,  orator,  farmer,  all  will  be  influ- 
enced bv  their  mode  of  life.  The  phvsician  will  say  in  conversa- 
li  n:  "A  purgative  must  be  used  in  this  case,  but  in  that,  the 
kiiiii'."'^  The  musician  will  sav :  "These  words  are  out  of  tune, 
those  are  not  in  harmonv."  *  For  each  and  everv  man,  whatever 
his  profession,  there  will  be  his  own  individual  character. 


rhetoricians.  The  Ars  Rhetor ica  is  certainly  not  by  Dionysius  as  it  stands,  but  con- 
tains many  additions.  Of.  Usener,  Dion.  Hal.  de  Imitaiione,  Kpiloyus,  especially  p. 
4  f.,  141  f.;  Sad^e,  Dissert.  Phil.  Argentor.,  IT.  p.  113  tF.;  Blass,  De  Dion.  Hal.  Scrip- 
tis  Rhetor.,  p.  24  f. 

1  It  is  to  this  kind  of  ethos  that  Plato  refers  in  the  third  book  of  his  RepnbliCy 
where  he  treats  of  inifxr](ns,  and  discusses  what  classes  of  characters  are  most  valu- 
able as  examples  to  the  youths  of  his  ideal  state. 

*  Reading  rpax^s.     Cf.  Plato,  Cratylus,  40(3  A,  rh  /x^  rpaxv  rod  fjdous. 

*  5e?  toOto  iKKadcipai,  ^Knixitv  avr6. 

*  irapa  n(\05  Kfy^is,  ov  avvaSei  rh  \€y6fj.€va. 


Distinction  between  to  irpeirov  and  rjOoTroUa. 


11 


Distinction  between  to  irpeirov  and  rjOoTToda. 

The   difference    between   to   irpe-rrov,   or  appropriateness,   and 
rjOoTroiia  is  not  clear  at  first.     In  the  tract  on  Lysias,  c.  9,  Diony- 
sius states  that  to  irpeirov  concerns  the  character  of  the  speaker,  of 
the  audience  and  of  the  speech.     To  be  appropriate  to  the  speaker 
an  oration  must  be  adapted  to  his  age,  race,  training,  pursuits,  mode 
of  life  and  other  characteristics.     AYith  respect  to  the  audience  the 
writer  must  consider  whether  the  speech  is  addressed  to  the  jury, 
the  senate,  the  assembly,  or  the  masses.     Furthermore,  the  style 
must  vary  with  the  parts  of  the  speech  as  well  as  with  its  subject. 
Now  I  have  already  shown,  quoting  the  Ars  Ehetorica,  that  ethos 
has  for  its  sphere  the  character  of  the  speaker,  audience,  and  sub- 
ject, and  it  would  thus  appear  that  the  two  terms  are  almost,  if  not 
quite,  synonymous.     But  a  careful  reading  of  the  tract  on  Lysias, 
c.  8,  shows  that  Dionysius  meant  rjOoTroua  to  refer  merely  to  the 
character  of  the  speaker,  while  to  irpeTrov,  as  defined  in  c.  9,  plainly 
includes  the  audience  and  subject  as  well  as  the  speaker.     Hence  it 
is  evident  that  the  sphere  of  rjOoiroua  is  more  restricted  than  that 
of  TO  irpe-Kov,  and  that  the  former  in  fact  is  to  be  regarded  as  a 
subdivision  of  the  latter.     Accordingly  r^doiroUa  in  its  relation  to 
the  character  of  the  speaker  is  the  subject  of  this  study. 


The  Relation  of  ivdpyeca  to  yjOoiroda, 

rjOoTToda  is  also  closely  allied  to  another  figure,  evapyeca,  or  viv- 
idness, the  graphic  presentation  to  the  senses  of  the  facts  of  the 
case  in  such  a  way  that  they  speak  for  themselves.^  It  is  effected 
bv  a  skillful  treatment  of  such  details  as  exhibit  in  a  lifelike  way 
the  actions  or  behavior  of  a  man  under  the  circumstances  in  which 
he  is  placed.  It  recpiires  therefore  a  keen  insight  into  human  nature 
and  its  motives,  and  contributes  to  that  rjOoiroua  whose  object  is 
not  only  to  delineate  a  man's  inner  character,  but  also  his  character 
as  shown  by  his  actions.  An  excellent  example  of  ivapyeia  is  the 
narrative  of  I^vsias,  Or.  1  §  6-27. 

SLaTV7rcoac<;  or  viroTTTvirwai^,  fidelity  to  nature,  is  yet  another 
figure  related  to  rjOoiroda  in  very  much  the  same  way  as  ivdpjeia, 

^  Cf.  Dion.  H.  de  Lysia  lud.  c.  7. 


12 


Ethopoiia. 


The  Practical  Value  of  Ethopoiia  in  Oratory, 


13 


\ 


It  is,  liowever,  not  identical  with  evdp^eta,  for  the  latter  involves  a 
urapliic  liveliness  that  is  by  no  means  always  involved— be  it  said 
\\  iili  regret— ill  fideHty  to  natnre.  A  further  explanation  may  be 
found  in  o    ;    tiiian  !^   2.58,  and  in  Volkmann,  p.  442. 

The  Place  of  Ethopoiia  in  the  Category  of  Figures, 

Although  it  is  thus  possible  to  distinguish  between  ethopoiia  and 
its  kindred  figures,  it  is  impossible  to  say  whether  it  Mongs  to  the 
category  of  the  figures  of  thought,  or  of  language.  For  it  involves 
both  thought  and  language,  and  tlierefore  cannot  be  said  to  belong 
exclusivelv  either  to  the  one  or  the  other.  It  is  simply  one  of 
those  figures  that  link  the  two  classes  together  in  closest  union. 

The  Practical  Value  of  Ethopoiia  in  Oratory, 

The  practical  value  of  ethopoiia  as  a  tool  in  the  oratorical  work- 
shop was  as  a  means  of  persuasion.  The  Attic  jury,  made  up  by 
lot  of  all  classes  of  citizens,  rich  and  poor,  educated  and  ignorant, 
was  influenced  almost  entirely  by  its  opinion  of  the  moral  worth  of 
the  defendant  or  plaiutil!',  as  the  case  might  be.  It  is  only  judges 
skilled  in  tlie  law  that  are  likely  to  be  influenced  by  argument  and 
evidence,  and  by  them  alone.  "  Every  man  his  own  lawyer  "  was 
\]\o  principle  at  Athens,  for  the  interested  party  had  to  plead  his 
n\M\  case,  although  he  could  consult  another  and  have  his  speech 
WTittcn  for  him,  if  he  so  desired.  Naturally  he  could  not  sound 
tiitj  trumpet  in  praise  of  his  own  merits,^  for  such  action  would  have 
been  disastrous  to  his  suit.  Hence  it  became  the  duty  of  the  clever 
siH  li  writer  to  place  those  words  and  expressions  in  the  mouth  of 
his  client,  that  would  produce  the  effect  of  innocence  and  true  worth, 
without  any  overt  statement  of  the  same.  The  farmer's  language 
cnv -r-  of  the  fields  and  farmvard,  while  the  soldier  has  the  air  of 
the  cm  Hi',  nid  refers  as  if  by  accident  to  battles  fought  for  home 
aial  fatiierhuul.  I>y  these  and  similar  means  an  effect  was  produced 
upon  the  jurymen  that  was  well-nigh  irresistible.  But  very  deli- 
cately the  work  had  to  be  done.     A  touch  too  little,  and  the  jury 

'  To  what  extent  an  Athenian  could  dwell  upon  his  own  meritorious  actions  is 
shown,  e.  (jr.,  in  Or.  10,  \  13,  15-17.     CJ.  also  pp.  19,  20,  22, 25,  of  this  dissertation. 


failed  to  catch  the  meaning  of  this  "  speech-artist  ^' ;  a  touch  too 
much,  and  the  case  was  lost.  The  Greek  mind  was  very  quick, 
and  with  true  artistic  feeling  preferred  a  suggestion  to  complete  and 
perhaps  revolting  detail.  Realizing  this  the  logographer  handled 
his  tool,  ethopoiia,  with  very  great  delicacy,  and  often  gives  only 
the  faintest  suggestion  of  a  line,  where  a  vulgar  realist  of  modern 
times  would  draw  a  mark  thick  and  long.  It  may  be  on  account  of 
this  adumbration  of  the  character  that  some  thick-witted  critics 
have  failed  to  detect  the  ethopoiia  where  delicate  analysis  shows  it 
plainly  to  exist,  and  it  will  be  one  of  the  objects  of  this  disserta- 
tion to  show  this  fact  in  several  cases. 

There  was  yet  another  good  reason  making  for  the  use  of  etho- 
poiia. It  was  the  necessity  of  concealing  the  hand  of  the  logographer 
by  giving  each  speech  individual  traits,  as  the  professional  speech- 
wTiter  was  not  in  good  odor  in  Athens  in  those  days,  and  to  make 
use  of  his  art  was  hardly  creditable,  although  customary.^ 

To  handle  this  keen-edged  and  even  dangerous  tool  properly  and 
effectively  required  a  subtle  mind,  and  such  a  mind  we  find  in  that 
keen-sighted  Greek  orator  who  is  justly  famous  for  his  perception 
and  portrayal  of  character,  Lysias.  In  this  quality  he  excels  alO 
others,^  and  it  is  a  feature  of  a  piece  with  his  other  characteristics; 3 
yet  we  must  not  deny  the  other  orators  the  praise  that  is  their  due. 
Isaeus  holds  the  23lace  after  Lysias,  and  some  of  his  character  paint- 
ing is  admirable.  M.  Leon  Moy,  in  his  Plaidoyers  d^Isee,  has  de- 
voted considerable  space  to  a  description  of  some  of  the  characters 
in  the  orations  of  Isaeus,  and  his  remarks  are  well  worth  reading. 
But  Dionysius,  in  his  tract  on  Isaeus,  in  drawing  a  comparison  be- 
tween Lysias  and  the  later  orator,  shows  that  the  former,  excelling 
the  latter  in  simplicity,  and  less  apparently  artistic,  surpassed  him 
also  in  ethopoiia.  The  rhythmic,  periodic,  and  artistic  style  of  Demos- 
thenes was  not  the  natural  home  of  ethos,  but  we  find  it  often  in  the 
private  speeches  not  ineffectively  used,  notably  in  the  Conori,  which 
is  almost  Lysianic  in  its  ethic  coloring.  And  in  the  De  Corona^  that 
golden  mean  in  Greek  style,  ethos  is  admirably  employed,  especially 
at  the  opening  and  close,  where  it  would  be  most  effective.   Hyper- 

1  Cf.  Plato,  Phacdrus,  257  C,  D ;  Euthyd.  289  D,  E. 
*  Cf.  Dion.  H.  de  Lys.  lud.  c.  7. 


14 


Ethopoiia, 


Francken  on  the  Ethopoiia  of  Lysias, 


15 


tiat>.  ai^u  luade  skillful  use  of  ethopoiia,  aud  it  is  not  lacking  in  the 
(thr    intr.r^  1,iit  T.ysias  is  ahyays  facile  princeps. 


Lysias'  Use  of  Ethopoiia. 
Dlonysius  on  the  Ethopoiia  of  Lysias. 

tii  Lysias'  use  of  ethopoiia  Dionysius,  De  Lysia  ludicium,  c.  7  if., 
says  in  substance  :  "  Lysias  proved  himself  the  superior  of  all  the 
.  I!  tors  in  percei)tion  of  human  nature,  and  in  assigning  to  each  indi- 
\  idual  his  aphinpriate  emotions,  characteristics,  and  actions.  And 
therefore  1  accord  to  him  the  highest  praise  for  his  talent  and  skill 
ill  f]ie  employment  of  ethopoiia,  as  I  can  find  no  character  in  his 
works  poorly  delineated  or  lifeless.  Excelling  in  the  treatment  of 
those  features  in  whicli  ethopoiia  appears,  namely,  in  tliought,  lan- 
guage and  synthesis,  he  not  only  gives  the  speakers  sentiments  proper 
Mn<1  useful  and  moderate,  so  that  their  speeches  seem  to  be  portraits 
of  their  characters,  but  also  places  in  their  moutlis  appropriate  lan- 
guage, iii  r^Lyle  simple,  clear,  literal,  and  popular.  For  lofty,  strange, 
mvl  studied  terms  ill  befit  true  character  painting.  Furthermore 
his  method  of  synthesis  is  plain  and  sim])le,  for  he  recognized  that 
tht  nan:  I  a  1  home  of  ethos  is  not  in  the  periodic  or  rythmic  style,  but 
iv  rfj  StaXeXv/jLei^T]  Xe^ec.  In  every  respect  Lysias'  synthesis  is  pleas- 
ing and  persuasive,  and  it  is  so  natural  and  easy,  without  any  ap- 
jH  nance  of  striving  after  effect  or  of  art,  that  I  should  not  be 
siii  pi  i-ed  if  many  laymen — yes,  and  even  scholars  themselves  not  a 
hw— thought  that  the  result  is  reached  without  study  and  without 
the  use  of  rhetorical  methods."  In  c.  19  Dionvsius  mentions  the 
three  artistic  means  of  persuasion ;  ^  they  are  a  man's  actions  and 
ethos,  togeth(  i  w  itli  the  use  of  pathos.  "  Of  ethos,"  says  Dionysius 
in  ffffY't.  "  Lv<^in>^  made  most  skillful  use,  for  frequently  by  refer- 
rii, !  -  f  hi- .  lit  ni-  past  life  and  actions,  to  his  character  and  habits, 
he  j '  !  1 ;  i  vs  him  as  worthy  of  confidence  and  respect.  When  liis  life 
aiioid-  liu  oppn )itunity  for  this  method  of  treatment,  Lysias  himself 
mila-  ni>  =11'  ]i  a  <'haracter  for  his  client  that  he  is  deemed  entirely 
!   a  I  \    .! !  hy.      I  or  he  represents  his  conduct  as  polite,  aud  graceful, 

1  Cf.  Arist.  Rhet.  I.  2.  2  ff. 


rfl 


i 


and  modest,  and  makes  him  use  language  befitting  such  conduct. 
liis  client  is  always  cli=irL--:.Ld  at  injustice,  aii^l  is  always  endeavor- 
ing to  act  with  justice.  Every  detail  that  will  serve  these  ends  the 
orator  does  not  fail  to  introduce.'^  Such  is  the  opinion  of  the  Greek 
critic  on  Lysias'  use  of  ethopoiia. 


Francken  on  the  Ethopoiia  of  Lysias, 


A* 


Francken  however  in  his  Commentationes  Lysiacae,  fails  to  catch 
the  full  meaning  of  the  Greek.  For  he  is  of  the  opinion  that  Diony- 
sius means  by  the  ethopoiia  of  Lysias  the  giving  to  all  the  characters 
alike  a  certain  simplicity  calculated  to  win  favor,  and  not  the  indi- 
vidual portraiture  of  the  traits  of  each  person.  But  the  words  of 
Dionysius,  c.  8  :  ov  yap  ^iavoovjjbevov^  /jlovov  inroTiOeTai  ')(^pT](TTa 
Kol  €7ri6LKrj  Kol  fxerpia  tov<;  Xeyovraf;,  Mcrre  euKovaf;  elvac  Sok€lv 
TMV  i]6cl>v  tov(;  X6yov<;,  aXXa  koX  ttjv  Xe^iV  dTToSlSayac  toI<^  yOeacv 
olKelav,  fj  7r6(j)VK€v  avra  eavrcov  Kpartara  SrjXovcrOaL — these  words 
themselves  do  they  not  prove  the  contrary  ?  And  the  passage  from 
the  Ars  Rhetorica,  which  I  have  already  fully  quoted,^  is  yet 
more  conclusive.  Furthermore,  Francken  is  refuted  out  of  his 
own  mouth  when  he  says,^  following  Dionysius :  Lysias  -'  -  - 
pro  diversis  aetatihus,  studiis,  reliquisque,  quibus  homines  inter  se 
differunt,  variat  orationem.  T\  ^V  ^fuller,  Rauchenstein,  Blass, 
Perrot,  and  Jebb  plainly  disagree  with  Francken,  though  ]Muller 
states  what  is  the  case,  that  the  general  tone  was  that  of  the 
average  man. 

Finally  the  actual  facts  disprove  this  thesis  of  Francken's.  For 
in  the  speakers  of  Or.  10,  24,  31,  where  is  that  simplicity  that  he 
claims  Lysias  gave  to  all  his  characters  alike  ?  And  are  there  not 
manv  marked  individual  traits  and  noteworthv  contrasts  of  char- 
acter?  As  examples,  compare  the  characters  of  the  humbly  born 
Eupliiletus  of  Or.  1,  with  all  his  moral  dignity,  and  of  the  high 
born  defendant  of  Or.  3,  who,  despite  his  birth,  can  rise  to  no  such 
moral  heights.  Compare  the  patriotic  Mantitheus  of  Or.  16,  or 
Aristophanes  of  Or.  19,  with  the  political  "  trimmer"  of  Or.  25,  or 
Philon  of  Or.  31.     What  a  difference  between  the  affected  Cripple 


ip.  9,  10. 


Comment.  Lys.  p.  1. 


16 


Efhopolia, 


The  Flan  of  this  Study, 


17 


of  in.  _  i  and  the  simple  defendant  of  Or.  7  !^  And  indeed  Or.  1 
n1nnn  disproves  this  thesis,  as  there  is  a  noticeable  difference  in  the 
}Mt  traits  of  the  injured  husband,  and  the  rakish,  craven  Eratos- 
thenes ;  the  deceitfld,  unfaithful  wife,  and  her  serv'de  maid.  There 
is  also  a  striking  contrast  of  yet  a  different  group  of  characters  in 
O]'  1 9.    All  of  which  goes  to  prove  that  Francken  is  entirely  wrong. 

The  Influence  of  Ethopoiia  upon  Lysias'  Style, 

Lysias'  distinctive  style  throughout  his  private  speeches  is  due, 
I  think,  entirely  to  his  desire  of  winning  favor  for  his  client.  Per- 
haps the  most  effectual  means  of  securing  this  object  was  attributing 
the  appii.priate  thoughts  and  words  to  each  speaker,  and  therefore 
TO  irpeiTov  becomes  of  prinu^  ini})ortancc  as  the  ultimate  origin  of 
the  distinctive^  characteristics  of  this  orator.  Xow,  as  we  have  seen, 
ethopoiia  is  linked  in  closest  union  witli  to  irpeTrov,  a.nd  hence  to  it 
i-  dno  in  larg-e  measure  the  Lvsianic  stvle.  His  ])ure  Attic,  after 
the  Ibrm  prevailing  at  his  time,  was  ai)propriate  to  a  plain  Athenian 
citizen.  The  rhetorical  fi^rures  are  onlv  used  s])arinulv,  for  they  are 
iu  keeping  with  fine  writing  alone,  which  ill  becomes  the  humble 
or  inexperienced  speaker.  Fine  and  foreign  words  too,  are  avoided 
for  the  same  reason,  which  would  also  militate  against  a  periodic 
style.  Clear,  neat,  and  terse  expression  was  also  calculated  to  win 
fnvor.  whih'  as  for  the  relation  of  ivdpyeta  to  ethopoiia,  that  has 
already  Ix'cu  discussed.  As  regards  the  grace,  or  %ap£9,  of  I^ysias, 
it  cannot  be  said  that  he  applied  it  to  his  speeches  witli  the  conscious 
desire  to  persuade,  for  it  vvas  a  part  of  the  orator's  very  nature,  the 
('(ni<n!ni]i:it(*  flower  of  his  genius,  a  gift  born  witli  liim  and  not  to 
be  acquired  or  applied  consciously,  like  the  colors  of  the  painter's 
pfJette. 

A  V  uiiiparison  of  the  logographic  speeches  of  Lysias  with  Or. 
12,  nnd  with  his  ^OXv/jLTriaKOi;^  which  he  spoke  himself,  show^s 
that  there  are  noteworthy  ditterences,  in  the  line  of  ornamentation, 
betwecTi  the  two  classes  of  speeches.  In  Or.  12  the  style  is  more 
luii.-i.i,  and   i^.-^^  in  accord  with  the  distinctive  characteristics  of 

^  Frnncken  can  see  no  difference  here.  Yet  one  is  the  simple  speech  of  the  well 
burn,  I  he  other  the  affected  speech  of  the  low  born.  Which  is  all  the  diffierence 
in  tlie  world  in  my  humble  opinion  I 


II 


Lysias  as  we  know  him  in  his  logographic  speeches.^  This  would 
tend  to  show  that  he  departed  from  his  individual  style  when  writ- 
ing for  his  clients,  and  adopted  one  suited  to  their  position  and 
attainments,  and  therefore  more  likely  to  persuade  the  court. 

The  Types  of  Character  in  Lysias. 
The  Plan  of  this  Study. 

The  plan  of  this  study  has  been  to  group  the  characters  accord- 
mg  to  their  types,  and  to  show  how  their  traits  appear  in  the  thought 
language  and  synthesis  of  the  speeches,  as  indicated  bv  Dionysius.^ 
As  a  preliminary  a  careful  examination  was  made  of  all  the  speeches 
of  Lysias,  but  for  obvious  reasons  the  genuine  forensic  orations  are 
alone  included  in  this  dissertation,  and  among  these  Or.  12,  14  15 
are  omitte<l,  as  ethos  is  absent  from  them  on  account  of  thdr  polit' 
ical  nature.     Or.  1.3,  22,  27,  28,  29,  30,  are  also  of  a  public  char- 
acter,  and  are  referred  to  only  casually.     Or.  5  is  too  brief  for  us 
to  draw  any  conclusions.     As  regards  the  remaining,  the  plan  has 
been  to  make  an  exhaustive  study  of  the  characters  of  Or.  1,  16, 
24,  and  a  less  complete  examination  of  Or.  3,  4,  7,  10,  17,  18^  19^ 
21,  23,  25,  26,  31,  32,  using  them  chiefly  by  way  of  reference'and 
comparison. 

It  would  be  interesting,  if  the  limits  of  this  dissertation  allowed 
to  show  ho^v  the  treatment  of  ethos,  coupled  with  other  phenomena,' 
proves  the  spuriousness  of  such  orations  as  8,  9,  20.     Its  absence 
certainly  casts  a  doubt  on  Or.  14,  15. 

It  is  hoped  that  this  essay  may  serve  as  a  contribution  towards  a 
more  general  knowledge  of  Greek  types  of  character  as  illustrated 
in  Greek  literature.  At  first  thought  it  might  be  supposed  that 
constant  comparisons  might  be  made  between  the  characters  of 
Lysias  and  the  other  orators  and  those  of  the  comedv.  But  further 
reflection  shows  that  this  cannot  be  so  in  the  nature  of  things,  for 
the  object  of  comedy  is  to  lay  bare  a  man^s  weaknesses  and  eccen- 
tricities, of  rhetoric,  to  explain  away  his  w^eaknesses  and  bring  out 
his  good  points.     Still  oratory  as  giving  portraits  of  the  different 

^  Of.  Morawski.  Zeits.f.  Oest.  Gym.  Vol.  30.  403. 
Cy.  p.  14  of  this  dissertation. 


i 


18  Ethopoiia, 

age  man  serves  as  a  good  screen  on  which  to  pro- 

,,M  t.  1.V  Avnv  .*f .  nntnist,  th^  i^ffuHaritics  of  the  persons  in  a  comedy. 


incu-j  ui    liii;  av  ci" 


A  c< 


!  )t '!  f  ♦  -r     i  i  ill  h  M  ~ 


.;ir:iti\r  -iihIx  -fihi-  l^in<]  miglithclp  the  interpreters  to  a 
iilinir  of  some  of  A  !i-i(»])hanes'  characters.  The 
I  in  ((jiiucU  obtains  with  regard  to  Tlicipinastus, 
hnarfrr  -t? lilies  are  devotorl  to  monV  failings  and 
Hiaii  to  their  nobler  traits. 
A  cursorv  comparison  of  the  jx^ints  developed  in  Ilibbeck's 
Ala^un  liii'l  Ivolax  witli  those  explaimd  in  the  following  study,  es- 
priillv  1 1!  ihiits  about  ^f  nititlicus/ am]>ly  illustmtes  these  state- 
ni  (its.  We  liiu  I.  in  tact,  go  into  other *de})artments  of  classical 
lib  iciiuiv  ii  we  would  find  resemblances  to  the  characters  in  the 
ornfnr^  to  ! !  nicr.^  to  Plato,^  and  to  tragedy,  especially  to  the 
law  \-r!'- !)...•! ,  hjuripides. 

The  Study  of  the  Types  In  Lysias. 

The  Patriotic  Man, 

Til    '|']irn-tn-  lias  given  us  an  amusing  description  of  the  char- 
acter ol'tiic  Hi  ni     *'  petty  ambition  {fiiKpo(f)i\oTi/xLa),  tliat  contrasts 
'U  of  !i  tlur  ambition  portrayed  in  the  orations  of  Lysias. 


W  if 


hit 


ThL.-^e  ticii^hi  iii  .serving  their  country  well;  they  are  (f)i\6Ti/jL0L* 
]);itr*  .tl<\  n  iiuif  "iir  orator  has  depicted  again  an«l  nijain  in  his 
,.ji,  1)1^  ^  .,j  ,,,1,.  icssly  with  good  effect  upon  an  Athenian  jury. 
Foremost  •  nn  n-  these  patriotic  men  is  Mantitheus,  the  speaker  of 
<  h  .  i(*,  iiii  in;bk.^t  of  all  the  men  we  know  through  Lysias.  Am- 
liti  iL  -ii'l!  as  he  and  others  in  these  orations  display,  Aristotle* 
h\\-  u~  !  a  mark  of  a  noble  character,  not  of  a  rash  or  boastful, 
a-  -in     ni  mK  in  commentators  would  have  it.^ 

Mannth  !i^.  n  voting  Athenian  about  thirty  years  of  age,^  came  of 
ail  !<i  innih  tiin  iia1  hmg  taken  a  prominent  part  in  public  affairs, 
!   II     I  !  it  its  tbrtuiies  in  the  recent  revolutionary  troubles.  Elected 

^  Cf.  p.  20  of  this  dissertation. 

'      11  a V man's  Odyssey,  Appendix  E,  and  G.  1. 
^  Cf.  I  >i\  N    \  i      I's  dissertation  on  Plato's  Gorgias. 
*The  good  sense  prevails  in  Lysias. 
^  Cf.  p.  20  of  this  dissertation. 


*  Bhet.  II.  15. 
'  Cf.  Blass,  518. 


|l| 


"# 


4 


r 


The  Patriotic  Man, 


19 


to  office,  his  confirmation  by  the  senate  Mvas  opposed  on  the  ground 
that  he  had  shown  hostility  to  the  democracy,  by  serving  as  a  knight 
under  the  Thirty,  and  also  on  the  ground  that  he  was  morally  un- 
worthy.    ,\^  the  first  charge  was  readily  disproved,  he  devoted  the 
larger  portion  of  his  defence  to  a  review  of  his  actions  as  a  man,  a 
citizen,  and  a  soldier.     Straightforwardness  is  the  keynote  of  Man- 
titheus' character,  whose  patriotism,  his  chief  spring  of  action,  appears 
in  his  devotion  to  his  various  duties  as  a  citizen.      For  at  home  he 
^vas  a  kind  and  generous  brother,^  and  in  jniblic  affairs  he  was  ever 
a  friend  of  the  democracy,^  and  entirely  unlike  other  young  men  who 
passed  their  time  in  gambling,  drinking,  and  other  evil  ways.^    He 
was  liberal  to  needy  citizens,^  and  no  one  ever  brought  suit  against 
him  for  any  cause.^     Zealous  in  the  performance  of  all  his  ordinary 
military  duties,  he  also  volunteered  in  deeds  of  risk  not  required  of 
him,"  and  was  never  found  hanging  back,  but  was  with  the  fore- 
most in  an  attack,  and  witli  the  hindermost  in  a  retreat.^    In  every- 
thing, in  short,  he  was  above  fear  and  above  reproach. 

Straightforwardness,  as  the  special  note  of  Mantitheus'  character, 
demands  more  detailed  study.     It  appears  in  the  frank  and  direct 
expression  of  his  thought  and  meaning,  in  his  simple  and  unadorned 
language,  and  in  the  brief  form  of  the  speech,  together  with  an  un- 
pretentious method  of  synthesis.     A  direct  narration  of  facts  in  a 
simple  way  is  a  mark  of  his  straightforwardness,  which,  however, 
appears  more  especially  in  his  readiness  to  advert  to  his  own  merits' 
of  which  he  is  fully  conscious,  as  every  true  man  must  be.     Illus- 
trations of  these  characteristics  are  noticeable  throughout.     At  the 
outset  he  displays  confidence  that  he  will  win,  in  his  somewhat  humor- 
ous expression  of  thanks  to  his  accusers,  especially  in  the  expression 
m  §2    €fiauT(L    Tnarevco,  the    usual    formula    being    Trio-reva^  rw 
SifcaUp,  or,  Tw  TrpdyfMari.^     Compare  with  this  passage  his  entire 
disregard  of  the  usual  supplication  to  the  judges  in  the  epilogue,  and 
his  slight  reference  to  the  scrutiny  in  §  3,  8.     Xoteworthy  is  his 
detailed  recountal  of  his  own  merits,  reviewed  in  the  preceding 
paragraph.     But  especially  interesting  is  his  calm  and  assured  way 


'  For  questions  here  involved  cf.  Frohb.,  Einl.  z.  Bedef  Mant. 
'HO.  3,^4_9,  ,gjj 

'  ^f  10,  12.  7  ^^  13^  15   13^  j7  8  ^  jg 

•  Cf.  Frohb.,  ad  loc. 


§14. 


r 


20 


Ethoj)oiia, 


The  Patriotic  Man. 


21 


of  meetiiig  iiiv  taunt  that  he  was  too  young  to  speak  as  he  had  in 
pii!  li  •  matters,  §20,  21.  "I  fancy  I  was  rather  more  ambitious 
tlini!  1  -^ii  ill  have  been,  but  then  my  ancestors  have  always  been 
siaiL-iiitu,  and  al-.  i  knew  that  yon,  to  tell  the  truth,  have  little 
o]^iiiinn  of  men  that  take  no  part  in  public  aifairs."  A  man  that 
(lit!  things  out  of  the  ordinary  run  could  not  but  incur  malicious 
dislike,  and  iliat  such  existed  in  this  case  is  indicated  i)y  the  ex- 
pressions used  in  >^  1  toI^  dSUcoi;  hia^efiXri^evoL^y  §  2  et  rt?  Trpo? 
/x6  TV^^(iv€i  dijSco^  htaKeiixevoi;,  §3  irapa  rijv  Bo^av  kt€.,  §11 
irepl  6/jLOv  XoyoTTOtovprai;  koI  ylrevSpfievovi;.  Cf.  §  18  if.  He  IS, 
however,  plainly  inditferent  to  slander  and  gossip — it  cannot  affect 
him — but  tliere  is  occasionally  an  irony  entirely  devoid  of  malice  or 
bitterness,  and  this  is  but  another  evidence  of  his  self-confidence,  for 
he  would  not  dare  to  direct  his  shafts  against  others,  if  he  thought 
his  own  position  open  to  assault.  The  expression  evi]Oe<^,  "  good- 
natured,'^  in  §  0  is  an  euphemism  ironically  used  for  "  silly."  The 
periphrasis  rov  ae/ivov  ^reipicoi;  in  §  lo  is  an  ironical  reference  to 
Thrasvbulus.  A  quiet  irony  is  ai)parcnt  in  §  IG  :  "  Everybody 
was  alarmed — as  was  natural,  for  it  icas  hard  when  barely  rescuetl 
from  one  danoer  to  be  oblio^wl  to  incur  another  almost  immediatelv." 
In  §  18,  if  we  accept  Ilamaker's  clever  conjecture  o?  KOfin  for  roXfia, 
we  have  a  case  of  slight  irony  :  "  That  a  man  wears  his  hair  long 
like  the  knights  is  no  cause  for  liating  him."  ^ 

This  frank  self-consciousness  of  worth  is  never  marked  with 
boastfidness  or  undue  boldness,  althouirh  Mantitlieus  is  bolder  than 
anv  other  character  in  Lvsias.  His  behavior  is  the  outcome  of  the 
natural  pride  of  a  brave  man  in  duty  well  done.  Far  different  is 
he  therefore,  from  the  miie,'^  f//orio,sust\\i\t  the  words  of  Dobree  would 
lead  us  tt)  expect."  His  character  is  indeed  decidedly  different  in 
equality  from  that  of  the  hero  of  l^lautus'  famous  play,  for  Pyrgo- 
]^olynir'os  was  a  vulgar,  braggart  soldier,  with  all  the  vices  of  a  man 
risen  from  the  ranks,  w4iile  Mantitliens  was  the  lionorable  Athenian 
Li(  nil  iMM!!  r(;j(»icing  in  time  of  war  to  serve  his  country  in  her  armies, 
in  univ  ui  peace  in  her  senate  or  assembly.  One  was  a  low  born 
mercenary,  the  other  the  high  bred  ]>atriot.  There  are  in  this  char- 
•(<!*!    therefore,  as  Blass  observes,^  not  a  few  resemblances  to  the 


1  Cf.  lUass,  520,  note  6. 

*  Cf.  Adversaria,  I.  192,  and  Blass,  520,  note  5. 


3  T> 


P.  521, 


m 


;  ■ 


knights  of  Aristophanes'  play.  But  if  Mantitheus,  Athenian  of 
the  highest  type  though  he  was,  had  been  as  like  Alcibiades  as  the 
German  critic  finds  him,  would  he  not  be  know^n  to  us  otherwise 
than  through  the  superscription  of  a  private  oration  of  Lysias? 
Alcibiades  himself,  and  his  son,  are  the  objects  of  the  charges  brought 
in  Or.  14  and  15,  but  the  attack  is  so  virulent  and  cast  in  such  rhe- 
torical language  that  delicate  ethos  and  grace  are  banished. 

In  harmony  with  the  thought,  the  language  of  this  speech  is 
quite  simple  and  unadorned.  Several  expressions  occur  that  are  a 
little  removed  from  common  parlance ;  can  we  be  surprised  at  them 
in  the  mouth  of  JNIantitheus,  a  man  of  high  breeding  and  cultured 
associations?  Among  these  note  in  §  11  XoyoTrotovvra^;,  in  §  15  the 
half-ironical  irepcov  dvaSvo/jiivcov,  and  in  the  same  section  rrj^  rffjueri- 
pa^  (f)v\r}^  hvaTvj(^riad(Tr]^,  and  cf.  the  animated  expressions  in  §  1 5-1 7. 
The  rhetorical  figures  of  thouglit  are  absent,  the  ornamental  figures 
are  rare  and  of  the  most  connnon  kind.  Instances  are  epanaphora 
TToWov^  fiev  -  -  7ro\Xoi/9  ^e,  §  8  ;  a/xa  fiev  -  -  a/xa  Si,  §  21  ;  si/iiec- 
doche  in  use  of  plural  of  abstracts,  e.  g.,  irepl  kv^ov<;  rj  7r6Tov<;  rf 
€T€pa(;  TotavTa<;  dKoXaaias  Tvy')(avovaL  Ta<=i  Starpiffdi;  TTOiovfievoL, 
§11.  There  are  too  a  few  pairs,  e.  c/.^  p^pT/o-roi;?  6vTa<;  Kal  irpoOvfjLov^;, 
§  14,  Trpdrreiv  Kal  Xeyeiv,  §  21. 

In  invention  and  construction  this  speech  is  brief  and  direct,  and  its 
synthesis  is  thoroughly  simple.  Hiatus  is  avoided,  the  average 
being  1  case  in  14.8  Teubner  lines  against  a  general  average  of  1 
in  7  lines  in  the  forensic  speeches  of  Lysias.  This  enabled  the 
speaker  in  his  delivery  to  be  rapid  and  smooth,  and  it  was  proba- 
bly this  effect  that  was  desired,  as  it  would  contribute  to  his 
earnest  straightforwardness.^  In  periodic  structure  great  simplicity 
is  evinced  in  the  free  and  easy  sentences,  which  exhibit  periodic 
combination  in  but  3  cases  in  a  total  of  24  rhythmically  arranged 
periods.^  In  the  narrative,  which  prevails  in  this  speech,  there  is 
the  usual  historical  period,  now  with  terse  brevity  and  again  with 
massed  effect.^  The  order  of  words  in  the  sentence  is  natural  and 
emphatic,  and  therefore  not  ornamental.  Of  antithesis  and  balance 
there  is  no  more  use  than  w^e  should  expect  in  Greek,  and  the  homoi- 
oteleuta,  in  §  6  eveiatv elaiv,  and  in  §  18  aKoirelv fjnaelv, 

^  Other  influences,  unconnected  with  ethos,  may  have  been  at  work  however. 
*  Cf.  I  1,"2,  3,  5,  8,  9,  11,  12-15,  17-21 ;  and  see  Berbig,  p.  xii.  »  Cf.  I  14. 


oo 


Ethopoiia, 


setiii  lo  be  luiiuientiuual.  We  may,  perhaps,  recognize  some  orna- 
moTitntion  in  §  13  in  the  closing  of  two  balanced  clanses  with  the 
synonyms  vo/il^ovrai;  and  ))yov/jL6vov<;,  and  the  opening  sentence  of 
§  19  has  a  gnomic  form. 

A  good  citizen  like  .Mantithens  is  the  speaker  of  Or.  17.  Volun- 
tarily he  surrenders  to  the  state  a  large  pro})ortion  of  what  is  due 
to  him,  §  6,  and  displays,  especially  in  the  latter  part  of  the  speech, 
a  disinterestedness  that  makes  it  impossible  to  deny  him  the  trifle 
he  asks  for.  His  character,  as  exhibited  in  his  speech,  is  not  only 
patriotic,  but  also  simple  and  direct.  This  is  shown  by  the  brevity  ; 
!i  i  proem,  narrative,  argument  and  epilogue  are  reduced  to  their 
smallest  limits,  the  points  at  issue  being  dismisscxl  with  a  few  short 

statements  and  with  such  expressions  as  pa^iox? €vpi]a€iv,  §  1 ; 

paScov  elSevat  {yvMuai),  §  4,  7  ;  evyvcoarov,  §  4  bis?  The  narrative 
is  direct,  in  finite  verbs,  e.  g.  §  2.  The  language  is  simple  and  un- 
adorned by  figures  or  rare  words,  except  evyvcoarov.  That  round- 
ing is  apparent  in  the  syntliesis  which  is  required  for  succinctness 
an. I  .  .npactness,  but  the  sentences  are  free  and  running,  and  hiatus 
is  not  avoided,  as  there  is  but   1  case  in  each  2.5  lines. 

More  like  Alantitheus,  though,  is  the  speaker  of  Or.  21,  for  he 
shares  with  liim  a  conscious  pride,  as  well  as  patriotism  and  a  certain 
simplicity.  Far  beyond  tlie  demands  of  the  laws  lias  he  performed  a 
citizen's  duties,  spc  nding  large  sums  upon  the  state,-  though  limiting 
his  private  expenditures,  and  bravely  has  he  staked  his  life  for  his 
country,  without  indulging  in  regrets  for  wife  and  children  at  home. 
For  is  not  death  and  bereavement  better  than  the  disgrace  of  being 
saved  like  a  coward  ?  ^  I'roudly  thus  he  recounts  his  meritorious 
actions,  ]ioInting  his  statements  witli  suitable  maxims,  and  showing 
in  :t]]  that  above  all  he  prizes  honor,  and  that  he  deserves  well  of  his 
country,  in  return  for  his  benefactions  and  services,  which,  it  should 
Lt  iiuuil,  he  does  noi  disdain  to  point  out  to  his  judges.*  Yet,  al- 
thcnvjh  n  i^rominent  and  wealthy  citizen,  he  does  not  display  any 
forwardness  like  Mantitheus,  and  he  sets  up  no  superior  claims  for 
Iii-  political  insight  like  the  speaker  of  «  h.  20,  but  only  bases  his 
ckiiiaiiii.^  upon  duty  well  done.  His  pride  in  the  performance  of 
his  duties  is  apparent  tlierefbre  in  in's  statements ;  and  the  form  in 


^  Cf.  Blass,  618,  note  2. 
^  ^  23  f. 


'  i  16  f. 

*§5,  6,  11,  15,  16. 


The  Patriotic  Man. 


23 


which  his  fmnk  thought  is  expressed  is  simple  and  direct.  The 
language,  which  is  plain  on  the  whole,  gives  a  hint  that  we  should 
look  to.  There  are  6  cases  of  the  figura  etyniologica,  while  in  Or. 
16  it  occurs  not  at  all.  This  is  1  case  in  each  1.2  pages,  although 
the  Lysianic  norm  is  1  case  in  each  2.5  pages.^  Now  this  figure  is 
a  mark  of  common,  vulgar  speech ;  is  it  therefore  too  fanciful  to 
infer  that  Lysias,  with  his  delicate  pencilling,  is  delineating  a  rich 
plebeian,  and  one  too  like  the  veoirXovrot,  fonder  of  effect  than  the 
aristocratic,  yet  simple  Mantitheus  ?  For  take  into  consideration 
the  conscious  pride  before  mentioned,  and  notice  a  rather  ornate  sen- 
tence structure,  with  antitheses  not  infrecpiently  pointed  with  homoio- 
teleuta,  e.g,  §  16  toar  ISia  fiev  rcov  ^ovrcovy  (^et^oyitat,  hi]iJiocria  he 
\6CTovpya)v  rjhofiai.  Cf,  also  §  9,  12,  13,  14,  15  his^  and  especially 
§  17,  18,  19  bis,  24.  Note  too  the  ejxinaphora,  §  8  iroo-a,  rj  iroaa, 
7]  iroaa,  §  18  o)?,  t)  &)<?,  r)  &>?,  §  25  avd^ia  fiev,  avd^ta  Se.  It  might 
also  be  observed  that  there  is  another  mark  of  popular  speech,  in 
addition  to  Jig.  ctym.,  in  the  failure  to  avoid  the  repetition  of 
dvr]\(oaa  in  §  1-5.  In  one  form  or  another  there  are  9  cases  of 
this  word,  and  5  of  eVt/cT^cra,  iu  25  lines.  The  recurrence,  to  be 
sure,  is  more  or  less  inevitable. 

Patriots  of  a  different  stamp  we  meet  in  Or.  19.  The  father  has 
served  his  country  nobly  ov  (^tXor^yLtta?  eveica,  dWa  TeKfjui^piov 
TToiov/jbevof;,  /crej^  (fyiXoTL/jLLa  here  meaning  "  ambition.''  Like  the 
speaker  of  Or.  21,  he  spent  more  money  on  the  State  than  on  his 
family,  and  was  unfailing  and  constant  in  all  his  duties  as  a  citizen,^ 
helping  friends  and  needy  Athenians,^  but  without  attracting  public 
attention  to  his  good  deeds,  and  winning  honor  for  himself  and  the 
state  by  his  successes  in  the  Nemean  and  Isthmian  games.^  Dis- 
interested in  money  matters  he  saw  that  the  marriages  in  his  family 
were  made  only  with  a  view  to  the  merits  of  the  suitors.^  Further- 
more he  concerned  himself  with  his  own  affairs  alone,^  and  was  very 
different  in  his  steady,  old-fashioned  ways,  from  the  ambitious,  ven- 
turesome Aristophanes  of  this  same  speech,  who,  like  so  many  men 

^In  accordance  with  the  count  of  E.  R.  Schulze,  Be  fig.  etym.  ap.  Or.  Attic,  usu, 
in  Commenlt.  phill.  in  hon.  Rihbeck,  including  only  the  genuine  private  orations.  Cf. 
pp.  25,  32,  34,  of  this  dissertation. 

« I  56.  '  I  9,  m,  57,  59,  62,  63.  *  §  18,  59.    q.  Or.  16  §  14. 

?  63.  \  12-17.  ^  §  18  Ttt  kavrov  vparreiv. 


Ethopoiia, 


The  Patriotic  Man. 


25 


11   those  stirring  times,  was  launching  forth  from  tlie  quiet  shores 
oi  A  n  J«  i   nil  ^<  Making  glory  for  self  and  fatherland  in  all  the  regions 

I  .r      !    I       !  \-\-~.      -I'm  \       .  ; 


l;p.\ 


I  ;  M 


MT  C 


1  j  rts  adjacent.^  Poor  yet,  like  his  richer  fatlier-in- 
)us,  money  was  no  motive  with  him,  but  ambition  and 
iiL  love  of  adventure.  A  devoted  citizen  he  servetl  the  state 
in  inv  ways,^  as  his  father  did  before  him.  TT' Tice,  we  have  in 
these  two  characters,  as  Professor  Jebb  j)oints  out,^  the  steady 
Atlieniin  of  the  old  type,  and  the  adventurous  patriot  of  the  new 

SC11U(,)1. 

Tlir  -nil,  who  makes  the  speech,  is  of  the  same  type  as  his  father, 
clinging  steadfastly  to  the  good  old  ways.  This  is  shown  in  a  very 
subtle  wav  by  his  adherence  to  the  old  fashioned  re  -  -  re,  for  Kai 
Kai.  i  lis  youth — he  is  thirty  years  old^ — and  consequent  inex- 
perience, are  emphasized  throughout  his  speech,  by  a  display  of 
in  xlesty,  a  lack  of  clear  logic,  and  by  occasional  forci])le  expres- 
sions. Modesty  is  apparent  in  his  saying  little  of  himself,  in  his 
ill  i  ixliaviin'  in  not  answering  his  father  back,  in  avoidance  of 
public  life,^  in  his  respectful  and  timid  demeanor  towards  the  judges,^ 
nniission  of  usual  attacks  on  opponent,  and  in  the  use  of  modest 
formulae,  and  in  repetition  of  the  same  formula,  e.  g,^  &><?  i'^oy  ukovw, 
ah-'nKnn  yap  eycoye  Kai  rov  7raTpo<^  Kai  oXXcjov  irpecr^vrepcdv,  w? 
6  'cri,  ktX.  Cf.  §  5  bis,  14,  19,  45,  46,  48,  53,  and  §  1  ottw?  av 
SvpM/xat,  mod(»st.  These  expressions  modify  common[)lace  senti- 
liicius  a-  w  c  ii  ao  facts,  e.  g,,  the  two  instances  in  §  5.  The  modesty, 
]H  riiaps,  is  a  little  overdrawn,  e.  r/.  §  55,  62,  but  the  serious  nature 
of  the  case  seems  to  have  dcmandcxl  it.  As  to  his  inexperience  and 
sim])licity,  marks  of  them  are  such  expressions  as  pnhiov  yvwvai, 
I  i  ^,  ::  f  .*'27,  5?^.  QT.  §  4,  5,  1 1,  16,  48,  50,  52.  The  lack  of  sharp, 
logical  reasoning  is  specially  apparent  in  §  34-44,  48,  52,  63, 
ahhouiili  a-  i  x  hole  the  ar<>:umentation  and  invention  are  clever 
aiiJ  effective.^     I'lain  and  unadorned  as  the  language  is, — suiting 

1  q\  Blass,  530  f.,  538.        ^  ^  i8_23^  29,  34-44.        » Jebb,  Attic  Or.  175,  240. 

^\  13,  3  clauses  united  by  ri  used  thrice;  \  18,  2  clauses.    Cj.  Jebb,  169,  note. 

»^55.  '  «/6id.  7^56. 

^To  evince  m  knowledge  of  popular  wisdom  betits  a  speaker  who  would  dis- 
ci nni  ali  praciic  1  ;ind  personal  experience  in  such  things.  CJ.  ^  5,  53,  59,  61, 
an.!  r.ht'^'^,  539,  Nviili  note  4. 

"  Cj.  VA-A<<.  53r>.  note  3,  537,  note  2. 


the  modesty  of  the  speaker — yet  in  pathetic  passages  it  does  not 
fail  to  show  traces  of  that  force  that  young  men  display  under  such 
circumstances,  e.  .g^.  §  11,  34,  49,  53,  54.  As  an  instance  note  espe- 
cially §  34,  54,  TT/oo?  Qeoiv  'OXvfjLTricov,  forms  of  swearing  being  very 
uncommon  in  Lysias.^  To  accord  with  the  language  and  thought 
the  synthesis  is  plain,  with  rare  continuous  rhythmic  effects,  with 
few  antitheses  and  hornoioteleuta,  with  frequent  hiatus.^ 

We  have  now  learned  that  the  father  and  son  of  this  oration,  though 
like  Mantitheus  and  Aristophanes  in  pride  in  duty  well  done,  are  un- 
like them  in  their  retiring  dispositions, — a  trait  the  son  has  carried 
to  the  point  of  extreme  modesty.  This  same  retiring  disposition,^ 
coupled  with  pride  in  magnificent  services  to  the  state,^  is  found 
again  in  the  speaker  of  Or.  7.  He  displays  a  certain  confidence  in 
himself  in  that  he  is  not  afraid  to  come  before  the  court  and  to 
allow  it  to  treat  him  as  it  will,  while  his  foes  are  cowards  who  did 
not  have  the  courage  to  bring  the  charge  against  him  in  person, 
but  suborned  a  miserable  sycophant  to  take  their  place.^  He 
is  not  ^vithout  a  sense  of  humor,  for  he  suggests  that  this 
sycopliant,  Xicomachus,  was  prompted  by  patriotism,^  and  even 
asks  the  court  if  it  has  not  the  same  opinion.''  The  speaker  is 
a  citizen  of  some  wealth,^  but  is  probably  of  humble  antecedents,  or 
at  least  not  a  man  of  high  culture.  For  note  the  5  instances  of 
figura  eti/mologica,  an  average  of  1  case  in  1.6  pages,  especially  the 
4  instances  in  4  sections,  §  38-41.^  The  language  too,  iu  harmony 
with  the  simple  thought  and  his  retiring  disposition,  is  unadorned 
with  rhetoric,  and  yet  vigorous  when  vigor  is  called  for;  e.g.^1, 
12.  In  §  1  indeed,  the  naive  hyperbole  is  another  characteristic, 
like  the  Jig,  etym.,  of  popular  speech,^^  and  the  prolixity  noted  by 
Francken ''  in  §  5,  6-8,  11,  17,  c/.  §  12,  21,  may  well  be  considered 
as  contributing  to  the  same  eifect.^^    Moreover,  the  technical  language 

^Cf.  Rehdantz,    DemoMh.  Neun  Philip.   Reden,  Index  II.  s.  v.   Schwiirformeln, 
and  references  there  cited. 

*  1  case  in  2.3  lines.  ^  Or.  7,  ?  1  vcrvxiav  dyoyn,  i.  e.,  airpdyfxwv. 

*  Cf.  ^  31,  41.  5  I  39,  40 ;  cf.  §  20.  ^  §  20  d  5h  rrjs  7r6\(oos  €ueKa  iVpaTTey. 
7  §  38.  ^  Cf.  i  21,  31.  »  Cf  pp.  23,  32,  34,  of  this  dissertation. 
»o  Cf  Morawski,  Zeits.  f  Oest.  Gym.  Vol.  30.  404. 

"  Commentt.  Lyss.  53,  54.     But  Blass,  595,  ad  fin.,  thinks  this  apparent  prolixity 
essential  to  the  evidence. 
"  Cf.  p.  32  f. 


F 


Oi: 


Ethopoiia, 


I 


The  Patriotic  Man. 


'11 


about  olives  and  olive  stumps  gives  the  individual  color  of  a  man 

1  iually,  in  synthesis  Or.   7  is  perfectly 


iimoi:. 


\\  ifii  these  patriotic  Athenians  we  may  compare  the  senator  of 
Or.  '■){,  ill  iliLiL  he  comes  forward  against  Philon  only  from  a  strict 
sense  of  i\\\^y~  nnd  is  n(^t  prompter!  by  any  personal  reasons. 
Without  adverting  hi  any  way  to  his  own  character,  as  was  fitting 
ill  ;i  111;  !i  [jrosecuting  a  public  suit,  he  betrays  a  severe  though  dis- 
passiuuate  sense  of  justice.^  And  in  proof  of  this  read  his  dissection 
f  Plnl'ii's  career,  §  8  fT.;  it  is  searching,  but  thoroughly  fair,  and 
supported  by  ample  evidence.  As  becomes  the  importance  of  the 
case  he  speaks  with  force,  and  employs  a  full  measure  of  senatorial 
ornnment  and  rhetoric,  so  that  there  is  more  of  this  than  is  usual 
i'l  Lysias.^  But  such  language  w^as  demandcMl  by  the  dignity  of 
the  body  before  wliom  the  spcMX'Ii  was  made,  and  the  rank  of  the 
speaker,  which  required  an  approximation  to  the  76^09  crufi/3ou- 
XevTiKc.v.  So  it  i<  nii  index  of  the  character  of  the  speaker,  whom  it 
1  ]■  !)gs  l)efore  our  eyes  in  all  his  senatorial  stateliness.  His  force 
appears  in  the  thought  of  such  phrases  as  hia  to  fxr]  rrjv  iroXtv  ktc. 
§  (j,  Liie  liist  sentence  of  §  14,  and  §  21,  22 ;  and  in  the  freipient  use 
of  t]i'  rhetorical  figures  of  thought  in  argument,  e,  g.y  av^rjo-t^if 
{exac/geratio),^  elsewhere  rarely  used  by  I^ysias,  in  §  8  airaat  toI<; 
aWui^-,  §  34  Kaivd.^     The  last  instance  is  also  a  case  of  itidigmdioy 

as  is  §^11   oaoi ci^ioi  iicrivJ     In  §  lU  Kalroi i7roir]aev  dv, 

?  2'^  '■  XT  s 7roi7](T€iev,  and  §  28,  we  find  tlic  argument  in  form  of 

the  eondusio  a  minori  ad  maius,^  Further,  note  in  §  ll  ovk  uito  \arj<; 
KTe,  hj/perhole,  §  8  ?;9  -  -  -  fiejivr^fiaL,  jwacmnnitio,  §  20  o'la  -  -  - 
7Tan>]fjr,\  ajJosiopesiSf  §  24  f.,  hypophora^  §  27  (ikovo)  S'avrov  Xeyeiv, 
procataivpsis.  This  formidable  array  of  figures  is  a  mark  also  of 
rni^u'OTi]^,  \\  liich  is  further  enhanced  by  tlie  language.  Observe  the 
jHiipi liases,  §  1  T/ji>  irepl  avrov  Ka/clav,  uncommon  for  r.  avrov  /c., 


^  Francken,  5,  designates  him  an  agricola,  on  the  basis  of  ^  18,  tovs  y^irovas,  L  e., 
^^ruri  habitat^' !     He  may  also  have  in  mind  ^  11,  avrhs  yewpyw.     Not  sufficient 

ivnitii,       ii       a    rather  a  landed  proprietor. 

*  i^  -•  'Cy.  ^^  1,2,5,6. 

*  Hence  ^<.iut    have  adjudged  the  speech  spurious.     But  cf.  Blass,  485,  Froh- 
litim  t     I'Anl.  z.  Or.  31,  ^  5. 

^ '    ■  nil.  .   i.  with  note  22.  ^  qj-  Prohborger,  ad  he. 

'O-  i^'i'i-  «Q:Frohb.  on  §28. 


§  7  aiCLvhvvay^  top  ^lov  Sidjeiv,  §  26  TrpovScoKe  rrjv  eXevOepiav, 
equivalent  to  fcaraSovXovv.  Also  in  §  2  l^lav  ex^pav  ovSe/julav 
/jLeTairopevofievo^;,  the  last  word,  which  does  not  occur  elsewhere  in 
classic  Greek,  seems  to  be  used  to  produce  fulness,  instead  of  the 
more  usual  /z,eTep%o/xez^o<?  or  fienoyv}  Indeed  the  whole  oration  seems 
weighted  down  with  heavy  forms,  especially  passive  aorists,  e.  </.,  §  3 
(x)(j)6XT]0r}vaL,  dirohoKi^ao-Orjvai,  §  9  KareipyacrfjievoK;,  avyKareXOeiVy 
Karepyaad/jievo^,  cf.^1  SoKt/jiao-Orjao/ievov,  §  19,  20,  26,  27,  etc. 
Rare  words  also,  or  unusual  in  the  orators,  are  §  7  dKLvSvva)<;,  §  1 0 
Svcrrvxv/^f^y  §  12  raXatTrcopelv,  §  19  dhwafiiav  (not  rare  in  Plato) 
and  uTrep/jLLo-y^aare,  §  24  TOLjdprot,  §  25  dpLvrnjuovelv.  Unusual 
phrases  are  §  15  Xecrovpyelv  roU  a-wixaatv,  §  31  diropprjTa  TTjprj- 
aai?  Marks  of  higher  style  are:  §  11  fcaOearriKe  for  ean,  §  24 
rd^  Xdpira^,  plural  of  abstract,  such  old-fashioned  uses  as  §  2  re 
solitariitm,  §  19  re  -  -  -  re,  and  the  extraordinary  proportion  of 
articular  infinitives  in  this  oration.^  rew?  fiev  too  in  §  8,  has  an 
archaic  color  in  an  orator.^  There  is  a  tendency  towards  senten- 
tiousness  ^  in  this  oration,  and  even  towards  a  sophistic  ring,^  that 
is  very  apparent  in  the  synthesis.  The  structure  of  the  sentences 
is  artistic  ^  and  the  order  of  words  is  not  always  natural,  e.  g.  dis- 
placement of  ehacy  §  5,  after  y^yelaOat;  it  belongs  to  dvayKolov 
a(pi(Ttv  avTOL^.  Not  to  speak  of  ordinary  cases  of  antiiheHcs,  we 
have  them  here  ornamented  with  hnmoioteleuta  and  balance,  7  cases, 
in  §  2,  9,  12,  17,  19,  25,  31,  with  chiasm,  e.  g.  §  2,  and  with  paro- 
nomasia  and  assonance  to  an  unusual  degree,  viz.  in  §  9,  11,  17,  18, 
24,  26,  30,  31,  32.^  Such  a  double  case  as  §  9  iirl  KaT6Lpya(7fj,evoL<; 
fjidXXov  eXOelv  ^ovX6/jl€vo<;  i)  avyKareXOelv  Karepyaadfjievo^;  kt€., 
should  be  noted.  Sometimes  there  is  an  antithesis  of  form  even 
when  there  is  none  in  the  thought,  e.  g.  §  11  oaoc  Se  yvdyfiy 
TOVTO  eirpa^av,  ovSe/jnd^  avyyvd)fjL7]<^  d^toi  elatv.  And  thus  from 
every  point  of  view  this  speech  shows  the  rhetorical  color  of  the 
senate-house. 

1  Cf.  Frohb.  on  §  2.  '  For  all  these  cf.  Berbig,  xiiii. 

3  Cf.  Transactions  Amer.  Phil.  Assoc.  1S78,  13;  Amer.  Jrn.  Phil.  8.  334. 
*  Cf.  Frohb.  on  ^  8.  '  Cf,  I  5,  6,  10,  11,  24,  25.  « |  3  f.,  31.  ^ 

'  There  are  35  periodic  sentences,  7  of  them  in  combination.    Cf.  Berbig,  xii., 
and  Blass,  484,  note  2. 
8  Q.  Berbig,  xvii.,  and  Frohb.  Einl.  z.  Or.  31,  |  5. 


Ethopoiia, 


The  Simple  Man, 


29 


The  speaker  of  Or.  26  is  a  marked  contrast  to  the  dispassionate 
Miiuiur  ui  1  h-.  :>].  Devoid  of  statesmanship  or  patriotism,  lie  is  a 
party  inan,  hitter  out  of  the  fulness  of  his  hatred/  and  prosecuting 
the  case  in  the  most  scathing  terms.  Hence,  hold  expressions,^ 
apM-ti'i'lies,^  sentences  now  in  great  streams,*  and  again,  terse  and 
curt  like  "npniosthenes'.*  But  yet  more  unlike  the  senator  is  Philon, 
his  oi)poncnt.  This  Acliarnian^  is  a  selfish  nobody  that  consults 
only  his  own  interests,  sacrificing  family  or  state,  as  the  case  may 
be.^  hi  iii.^  huuiicssness  he  has  a  counterpart  in. Diogeiton  of  Or. 
32,  that  Diogeiton  who,  in  a  few  cruel  words,^  turned  loose  to  shift 
f  !  themselves  the  bovs  that  were  at  once  liis  <2:randcliil(lren,  his 
IK  pliows  niid  his  wards,^  having  made  away  with  the  inheritance 
h  n  ill*  111  i»y  I  heir  father,  his  brother,^^  and  regarding  all  as  of  less 
value  than  money.' ^ 

But  the  most  marked  contrast  with  Mantitheus,  the  speaker  of 
<  >i  Ul,  aiiil  the  other  patriots  whose  characters  we  have  studied,  is 
tho  politician  of  Or.  25.  He  is  a  "trimmer,"  suiting  his  politics 
to  his  interests; '2  a  practical  "worker''  and  no  theorist.'^  He 
'  \hibits  considerable  confidence  in  his  political  wisdom,  which  has 
carried  him  along  safely  so  far.'*  His  candor  is  certainly  admir- 
nlile.  His  style  is  not  vigorous,  yet  not  without  attempts  at 
rhetoric,'^ and  his  thouglit  is  often  cast  in  ample  expressions'*^  pi'cg- 
naut  with  nothing,  reminding  us  strongly  of  the  "big  talk",  with 
ii^^thing  behind  it,  of  modern  ward  politicians.  To  such  a  character 
patriotism  is  entirely  alien,  and  entirely  unintelhVible  as  a  motive 
for  action. 

In  these  orations,  25,  26,  31,  individual  traits  appear  with  far 
less  prominence  than  in  those  l)efore  treated.     Tliis  is  due  to  the 

1  Cf.  I  3-5,  9,  23.    See  Jebb,  245. 

CJ.   I   3   i-irKTvpovra  ra  Trpdy/j.aTa   Kal   SiaKKeirrovTa  /ct6.,  ^   4  aeiuvrja-roTepa,  '^  6 
ievra,  I   9   (Kw^-haavro,  I   17  ^aaavov,  ^.   21    fXKT o^-mxiav .     Cf.  also  I  16,  21,  and  see 

Blass,  480,  note  2. 

^?  17.     Ihere  are  in  all  22  periodic  sentences,  with  4  of  them  in  combined 
relation  to  each  other. 
«  Cf.  I  16,  and  see  Blass,  481,  with  note  2.  ^  q^  Qj.  31  ^  7  ff. 

«  Q:  Or.  32  §  9.  «C/.  §4,5,  12,  13.  ^o 

"  n7  ;  cf  I  25.  ^2  qy.  ^  8,  10. 

^*  QT.  ni  ff.  ^»  E.  g.  I  18,  parallelism. 

^«  Cf.  ^  5,  18,  34,  and  Blass,  516,  with  note  3. 


Cf  I  7,  8. 
»^  Cf  I  11  ff. 


? 


public  character  of  the  cases,  which  made  a  display  of  ethos  on 
the  part  of  the  speaker  inappropriate.  It  would  be  yet  more  out 
of  place  in  Or.  22,  27,  28,  29,  30,  as  the  speakers  in  these  are 
public  prosecutors  pleading  the  state's  case. 

Ihe  Simple  Man, 

Patriotism  we  have  seen  to  be  one  of  the  leading  traits  of  Lysias' 
characters;  no  less  frequent  is  simplicity,  Avhich  was  as  equally 
effectual  as  a  means  of  persuasion,  when  it  was  delineated  in  men 
of  humble  position  or  inexperience. 

Eiq)hiletus,  the  injured  husband  of  Or.  1,  is  the  leading  expo- 
nent of  this  trait,  and  he  is,  as  Mr.  Jebb '  says,  "  the  subject  of  an 
indirect  portrait  in  which  homeliness  is  combined  with  the  moral 
dignity  of  a  citizen  standing  upon  his  rights." 

He  was  in  very  moderate  circumstances,  as  appears  from  his 
own  statement  in  §  4,  from  the  simple  appointments  of  his  humble 
household,^  and  from  his  apparent  employment  in  some  field  labor.^ 
He  had  at  this  time  one  child,  still  a  mere  influit.'*  Despite  his  low 
degree  Eupliiletus  rises  to  heights  of  which  the  high  born  defendant 
of  Ov.  3  is  incapable.  And  this  moral  elevation  and  dignity  is 
shown  in  his  actions  throughout.  It  is  especially  apparent  in  his 
refusid  to  accept  a  money  compensation  for  the  wrong  done  him,^ 
and  by  his  inflicting  upon  the  offender  the  full  penalty  of  the  law. 
In  the  proem  he  distinctly  states  that  there  was  no  enmity  between 
him  and  Eratosthenes  except  that  due  to  the  latter's  seducing  his 
wife,  and  that  he  had  not  killed  him  for  money,  nor  for  any  other 
gain,  except  the  revenge  allowed  by  the  law.^  He  thinks  that 
there  is  no  way  that  he  might  not  have  used  with  all  propriety 
to  catch  the  man  that  had  saluced  his  wife,  but,  nevertheless, 
he  laid  no  ambush,  but  waited  until  he  knew  the  man  was 
in  the  house,  and  then  looked  for  those  that  would  help  him 
to  arrest  the  adulterer.^  Finally,  in  the  simple  and  earnest  words 
of  his  closino;  sentence,  he  savs :  "  For  now  both  my  body,  and  my 
property,  and  all  that  is  mine,  is  in  danger,  simply  because  I  obeyed 
the  city's  laws."  ^     These  words,  his  simple,  unsuspicious  nature,  a 


1  P.  174. 
»§  26,  29. 


f.  9. 


3§  11,  13. 
7  g  37  ff. 


*  H,  9,  12,  14. 
8  §50. 


U) 


Ethopoiia, 


*!'• 


!  1  1  I  '> 


L!  1   !h     f      iifidonee  in  a  favorable  verdict,  showing  that  he 

f.  d  Mil-  -  !  f<  pfitation, — all  are  testiinuiiy  to  his  moral 
In.  .  niv  ill  on  this  trait  is  the  insinuation  of  his  wife, 
in  §  13,  ti!.!!  lit  111  Ik  en  rather  free  wiih  the  maid  once  when 
<lr  ni%.  \\\\\  I  Lis  seems  to  have  been  given  and  taken  in  jest.  Even 
if  :i  i-  \v\u\  it  i«  not  an  incident  that  would  ofHiid  OrfMlc  morality, 
however  iii<  n  :~i.  iit  it  mav  be  with  modern  ethical  teachinir.  Quite 
ill  li-ii!  !m!!\  with  fhis  moral  dignity  is  the  absence  of  expressions  in 
niid.  iiiiuUiiiii  i>i  iiis  wife's  conduct,  as  well  as  of  any  show  of  pas- 
^<](m  nr  r^f  YrvY  i^rcat  anger.  Furthermore  Fiiphiletus  appears  to 
h  i\  M «  n  i  '  !  I  111]  onsiderate  to  his  wife/  so  that  she  had  no  just 
<;iji~  hu  H  1  nhict,  and  he  was  thougiitfiil  and  hospitable  with 
ill.-  liiLiul.-.  For  remembering  that  his  friend  :Sostratus  would  get 
linm,  tr„,  ]  ifr  f  n-  h}<  -n]>]>or,  he  asked  him  into  his  own  house  and 
-:nv   ih:if  ii- was  satisfied. - 

The  ii  incly  simplicity  of  Eupliilctus  a})pears  in  his  plain  and 
«lir.  I  ih.ii -iit,  in  lii-  >i!np]<'  and  uiiaffcct(Hl  language  reflecting  the 
t'  n.      i    !    !   i!;;!  -jM'ech   and  in  the  unadorned  svnthesis  of  the  ora- 

ill/  ^ 

tin.      \\  «    \\\\\   >tudy  this  simpleness  therefore,  from  these  three 


in  tiiuiigli;  (itc  <<p(MV']i  is  noticeable  for  an  all  pervading  tone 
"T  ni  .'!,-»  ihai  liarmonizes  with  Kuphiletus'  sim})le  character. 
1  i  '  (I'M  n,  p.  n-  with  a  succession  of  sentences  modestly  expressed 
in  i!ii  1  iiii  of  ideal  ccmditions.  In  §  4  he  sketches  what  he 
/;*  7  ry  \n  }^o  hU  pn.nfr  line  of  defcuce,  and  in  §  5  he  expresses 
if  ;  -  ;  i  '"  •'<•/  Hi  1!  ins  oqly  course  is  to  recite  fully  all  the  facts  of 
the  case.  In  ;^  .So,  47,  by  the  use  of  yi^kv  soUtarium  in  connection 
N^i^^  7''  -  liiodcst  effect  is  secured,  for  he  thus  expresses  his  state- 
m^-\\\-  -A-  hi-  jtorsonn]  -q'-n'on,  "T  H.!'  my  \k\v\  think,"  et<:'.,  and  not 


!  1-.!  n  f  i' 


\\\ 


hI^  .n.  I 


1    liicts.     The  e])ilogue  again,  though  earnest 

•     i   i    nipi*  h  iiiious.     The  direct  statement  of 

ft*-  nnnsh'inf'i  narnitivc  i-;  nn  plcmnnt  cnnfribntino;  largely 
-iinpi. ■.•!!. Mi  *n  fh--  -p't'ch.  \'tic  especi;i!i\"  ! he  short,  para- 
viWi'iv-.--  \\\  :  L  •'.  In.i*.-il  ih.  wliole  narrative,  §  G-27,  is 
v^'vn:\vk[\\A\-  -iiiijJc.  Ill  ;,  :,'^  iO  the  detailed  description  of  his  house- 
In-I^l   arrnnrj-oniPiit^.  v^  (|5iitc  in  n.w.rd  with  the  mi nnh^  explanation 


iart^  ant 

ti  .    I  111-    -! 


t 


n^' 


§  22,  23.     For  a  contrast,  cf.  Lyx.  Fragm.  75  ?  3  ff. 


The  Simple  Man. 


31 


of  ordinary  facts,  that  is  still  so  familiar  as  a  tedious  feature  of  the 
conversation  of  persons  from  the  lower  walks  of  life.  In  §  28, 
35,  Euphiletus  expresses  thoughts  that  are  almost  affected  in  their 
simplicity,  and  in  §  36  his  argument  on  the  evil  effects  of  a  con- 
demnation is  ahnost  comic.  The  way  in  which  he  tells  his  story 
without  evasion  or  omission  is  noticeable.  For  instance,  in  §  12, 
13,  charmingly  simple  is  his  repeating  his  wife's  remark  about  his 
little  experience  with  the  maid.  Another  feature  of  the  simpleness 
of  the  thought  is  the  absence  of  rhetorical  pathos  and  the  other  orna- 
mental figures  of  thought.  T^ity  is  effected  by  a  far  more  subtle 
tool,  the  pathos  of  facts.  Yet  another  feature  of  the  simplicity  is 
anacolouth  in  the  thought,  especially  in  §  40,  where  the  object  clause 
is  changed  unexpectedly  to  a  question.      Cf,  §  32  f.,  §  37.^ 

A  special  mark  of  his  simple  trustfulness,  as  well  as  of  his  moral 
dignity,  is  his  unsuspicious  nature.  He  had  entire  confidence  in  his 
wife,  although  at  first  he  observed  all  the  customary  precautions,* 
and  even  his  being  locked  up  in  his  bed-chamber,  the  unaccustomed 
noises  at  night,  and  his  wife's  being  adorned  with  cosmetics  at  an 
unusual  time,  did  not  awaken  his  suspicions.  But  when  he  was 
once  aroused,  all  of  these  incidents  came  home  to  him  with  over- 
whelming force,  and  he  was  filled  w  uh  suspicion  to  an  extent  that 
seems  to  have  overcome  his  simple  nature  with  astonishment.^ 
1 1  uceforward  he  kept  watch  with  the  utmost  caution.  When  he 
wished  to  learn  what  had  occurred  from  the  maid,  he  took  her  out 
of  the  house,  that  there  might  be  no  danger  of  their  being  over- 
heard.^ He  took  care  that  she  should  keep  quiet  about  the  matter,^ 
and  was  careful  to  detect  the  adulterer  in  the  act,  and  not  to  depend 
on  the  evidence  of  a  slave  alone.^  AVhen  Eratosthenes  was  in  the 
house  he  fi r^t  fold  the  servant  to  guard  the  door,  and  then  very 
quietly  went  after  his  neighbors.^ 

Like  the  thought  the  language  is  throughout  i)lain  and  unadorned, 
and  is  specially  indicative  of  tlhj  pur^iuuu  of  Euphiletus  in  that  it  is 
frequently  colored  with  expression-  drnwn  fmm  ]v>pniai  and  con- 
versational speech.  This  feature  is  evident  tirst  m  tiie  use  of  certain 
words  and  phrases.  N  i-  il;  :  blowing:  §  6  the  flimiliar  tone  of 
the  phrase  /i?;Te  \iav  eir  eKeivrj  elvat  on  av  OeXrj  uutelv.    Xiav  is 


1  Cf.  Blass,  577,  note  3. 


'§17. 

«  I  21,  23  ff. 


'^23. 


32 


Ethopoiia, 


nav  LXicpL  ill  Em i|'i<ies/  and  gives  a  special  color,  T  tliiiik,  wlier- 
px  rr  it  .M'.'TiiN  ;  eir  efceivr)  ehat,  smacks  of  popular  language;-  OeXco 
n-  nn  -4  to  iOeXo)  occurs,  outside  of  tragedv.  mainly  in  old  and 
Ihniiliar  phrases.  It  may,  however,  be  due  to  poor  MSS.,  a  fact 
tliai  only  too  often  hampers  the  interpreter  of  Lysias.  §  9  the 
rare  diminutive  oUlSlov  used  endearingly  and  familiarly.^  §  10 
the  raiml  change  of  suhjccts  in  the  words  iva  top  tltOov  avTM  SiSco 
Kal  fir)  0oa.  §  17  re  postscript,  an  old  .\ttic  usage  not  common 
ill  prose  literature,  but  still  lingering  perhaps  in  that  natural  home 
of  archaic  expressions,  the  language  of  the  common  ]^eople.'*  §  21 
the  conversational  use  of  ottw*?  with  the  future  indicative,  impera- 
tivelv.  Also  §  23  the  phrase  AcaXw?  avro)  elx^^y  repeated  in  §  39, 
and  equivalent  to  the  polite  expression  in  English,  "  Thanks,  no 
more/'  at  table.  Such  expressions  and  short  cuts  as  w?  top  Kal  top 
in  §  23,  and  top  Selva  in  S  41,  are  also  conversational.  Similarly 
the  ellipsis  of  KaTe^v^ep  with  ttw*?  'yap  dp  in  §  27.  A  very  impor- 
tant element  of  popular  speech  is  to  be  observed  in  the  play  upon 
words,  L  e.,fi(/ura  eli/moloc/ica^  in  §  26,  30,  44  bis,  45,  48,  and  paro- 
noma^Ui  in  §  29,  33,  34,  35,  37-8,  45,  47.  Akin  to  these  in  nature 
and  iiuct  is  the  use  of  tautologous  and  repeated  expressions.  As  an 
instance  of  repetition  note  liow  in  §  4,  25,  38,  40,  Euphiletus  repeats 
the  [1  i !  ase,  in  one  form  or  au(  jther,  etV  ttjp  oiKiap  T7jp  ifirjp  elaioip.  He 
seems  to  dwell  on  this  idea,  feeling  that  his  house  was  his  castle,  and 
thtit  tlie  infringement  of  his  household  rights  was,  after  all,  Eratos- 
thenes' great  offence.  Other  examples  of  repetition  are  airapTa  ^  5, 
^KOP  ff  dypov  i  11,  13,  TTUPTa  /jlov  eh  ttjp  ^pwfirjp  ktL,^  §  17, 
TTHT  /  (LKpL/So)^  §  19,  20;  compare  also  §  22,  23,  narrative,  with 
i^  :;i*  1 !  amnmcut,  and  §  25  with  §  29.  Tautology  is  noticeable  in 
§  5,  wiiere  the  expression  ovSep  irapaXeiircop,  /ere.,  is  unnecessary  ex- 

^  C/.  p.  37  of  this  dissertation. 

*  Cf.  Morawski,  Zeits.  f.  OesL  Gym.  30.  404. 

^  Quite  wrong  Morawski,  in  article  above  quoted,  in  supposing  that  hcofxanov  in 
§  17,  24,  27,  is  synonymous  with  oIkISiou.  It  refers,  of  course,  to  one  of  the  apart- 
ments of  the  house,  not  to  the  house  itself. 

'  i ;  ! I,  srkable  slip,  that  of  Berbig's,  p.  xiiii.,  where  he  notes  iixpiKiqros  of  ^  16  as 
a  r;i'-f  '.^ord  I 

^  (  y.  11     i!3,  25,  34  of  this  dissertation. 

*•  i  !i.  r*  i-etition  of  this  clause,  regarded  as  spurious  by  some,  is  defended  by 
1  i.  iiberger  as  an  example  of  familiar  verlMage. 


The  Simple  Man. 


33 


cept  for  emphasis.  Note  also  §  14  ovSep  elirwp  and  accoTrfj,  i^eXOwp, 
and  ef  0),  §  22  oUahe  co?  e'/ie.  In  §  26  the  words  spoken  by  Euphi- 
letus to  Eratosthenes  are  noticeable  for  their  verbiage,  and  the  excite- 
ment marked  by  their  rhythmic  flow,  for  afidpTi]fia  i^a/jiapTdpecp 
et9  Trjp  yvpacKa  tijp  i/myp  form  an  iambic  octonarius  acatalectic, 
provided  you  overlook  the  second  foot.  A  special  feature  of  the^^ 
tautology  of  this  speech  is  the  unusually  frequent  repetition  of  iyco, 
quite  without  special  emphasis.  This  too  is  a  well-known  charac-' 
teristic  of  the  simple  speech  of  the  lower  classes,  iyco  is  found  31 
times  in  this  speech,  a  contrast  with  24  in  Or.  3,  6  in  Or.  16,  and 
8  in  Or.  24. 

There  are  also  a  number  of  animated  expressions  in  this  speech 
that  are  quite  in  harmony  with  the  seriousness  of  the  subject,  and 
with  the  character  of  popular  language, — which  is  sometimes  only 
too  forcible  and  drastic.  As  examples,  note  §  14  ofico^;  S'  ovS^  ouro)? 
ovSep  etTrooPj  §  17  irdpTa  /jlov  eh  tijp  jpcofjirjp  eUrjeu  Kal  jjueaTo^  yv 
v7ro\lrLa<;,  §  45  irapoipia,  a  rare  compound,  §  26  ovk  eyoo  ae  diroKTe- 
PM,  dX)C  o  TTji;  TToXew?  pofjLO^,  §  35  irapa  tovtou<;  (tol;9  p6/jlov(;) 
e\doPTe<;,  and  §  49  vtto  tmp  po/xcop  tol'9  iroXiTa^  epeSpeveaOat.  In 
§  36  the  expression  tov<;  p6/jLov<;  tt)?  jxoL'xeia^  x^tpetp  idp  Sel  is 
animated.  In  §  44  the  polysyndeton  with  oijTe  gives  weight  to  the 
statements.  In  §  47  there  is  one  of  those  metaphors  so  dear  to  the 
people,  "  seeing  ^vllat  prizes  are  oifered  as  rewards  of  their  valor  in 
wrong  doing.''  The  rhetorical  adornment  of  figures  is  absent,  for 
they  are  inconsistent  ^vith  the  simplicity  of  Euphiletus. 

In  synthesis  the  same  simplicity  is  apparent  as  in  the  thought  and 
language.  Hiatus  is  scarcely  avoided,  for  the  average  is  1  case  in 
3.9  lines.  In  its  periodic  structure  the  oration  is  sim]>]o.  and  the 
ratio  of  combined  periods  to  the  whole  is  8:38  ;  among  these  there 
are  many  loose  periods  and  numerous  SlkcoXoi}  Balanced  clauses 
and  komoioteleuta  are  accordingly  hardlv  noticeable.  Cases  occur  in 
§  6,  34,  48.  Finally  the  order  of  words  is  natural  and  often  em- 
phatic, althougli  !!!  llio  proem  and  epilogue,  the  ornament  pro]3er 
to  the  opening  and  close  of  a  speech  is  to  be  found,  as  usual. 

The  marks  of  a  simj^le  nature  found  in  Euphiletus  we  have  also 
mkAkxX  in  the  speakers  oi  iJi.  7,  16,  19,  21.     The  same  trait,  united 

^  Cj.  Berbig,  xii.,  with  note. 


\ 


34 


Ethopoila. 


W'lii    |KIIh 


:i!it  i   Viguiy  i.>  '..'i^.-t^t-i" 


\  able  also  in  Dionysus,  the  plaintiff 

,^r  otlirr  \vmt^  are  kept  in  llie  background,  for  the 
.,H,-.ii  i-  ..r  ;!  jMaiii^'n!  -iKir:).'t*-r.  But  it  i-  ^^".  "iMIkH  presents 
ia...i  p.. nil-  -!'  !.---inM:m<'e  witii  ^  >r.  L  There  ;-■  the  same  variety 
of  rhnnin. T~-,  lin  ^auie  hi^iuciy,  almost  naive,  siiupkiirss,^  the  same 
<1  III  d  ur-iiptiMn  of  famih' affairs,  as  there  is  of  tlio  household 
ai !  iir:.  isH  in-  n  «  ^  1,^  and  finally  a  similar  use  of  the  language  of 
till  ptupu ."  A 1  !ig  with  his  simplicity  the  speaker  betrays  a  tender 
fprlinir  ^'f  <vnipnthv^  for  the  widow  and  fatherless  children,  that  in 
linn  V.  Ml-  ij  vnipathy,  and  which  probably  lead  them  to  put 
!i  !  cause  in  his  liands.^  Note  also  his  desire  to  shiehl  the  family 
UiuUiii^  iKjiii  public  curiosity/  His  feeling  passes  into  bitterness^ 
Avlin  hn  <>r,ntrni]ilntn-  tlie  cruel  behavior  of  Diogeiton  towards  his 
J  i  '  '  i  ini  -randciiildren,  who  were  at  the  same  time  his  wards. 
ih  i  uiiiss  is  enhanced  at  times  by  the  suspense  of  long  sus- 
lainul  periods,  e.  g.  §  2,  3,  18,  by  a  somewhat  tense  periodic 
,m.ii<  imv  ill  ]>nrt^  of  the  argument,  and  by  antitheses  occasionally 
iiiiriwii'n  1  :.v  paronomasia,  e.  g.  §  22,  rypdfji/jiaTa,  ;)^p7;/iaT&)z^,  and 
irv  Iwmoiofekufa,  e.  g.  §  19,  22,  25,  29.  The  synthesis  and  lan- 
'jnage  are   however,   plain  and  natural    as  a   whole,   though  not 


Withm;!    force. 


w, 


>\V   iW'il  i\ 


<  > 


\\  i  H  >l !  I    !  !  i' 


M  I- 


n 


m 


iiifii    •'!     Uiipi'! 

rnnvPiiif^lit  ^i' 


The  Clever  Man, 

•oach  a  character  of  different  type,  the  clever  man, 

n  i[)U  ui  Ui.  24  is  the  chief  exponent.     He  is  of  low 

ixceps  a  small  shop  near  the  market-])lace,^  much 

nttaii'onist  claims, — and  he  does  not  deny  it — by 

ip!  'I  risaiacter.  who  were  probably  attracted  by  its 

t    Ml.  and  i>v  iIk  dn>il  and  sarcastic  wit  of  its  owner. 


^Note,  i\'r  iir  laiice,  the  mention  of  the  gods  and  their  justice,  I  1,  3,  4,  92,  97. 
2  Cf.  ^  11,  first  sentence.  ^  Cf.  Or.l  I  (S  ff,  and  Or.  32  §  4  ff. 

•  \  ute,  for  ill  Lance,  old-fashioned  re  soUlarium,  ?,  1,  22.    Cf.  Or.  1  g  17  ;  the  repe- 
{\\\:>n  of  hunnrdrpio^  in  ^  4,  5,  c/.  p.  32;  the  popular  tone  of  riva  irort  v//uxV  ^X'*^''? 


:  .M:s  !>i^' 


t  i,, 


rlginal  words  repeated,  in  ^  12. 

*  '  /.  ;.  ii,  IS,  and  the  sympathy  and  indignation  of  the  words,  t)]v  kavrov 
dvyarepa,  Tfjirep  ijv  ahrcf  ix6vi],  'i  4,  "his  own,  liis  only  daughter." 

^>  Cj.  §  1,  2,  10,  1 1.  ''  ^  2  /XTjSeVa  riisv  HKXcjv  dSevai. 

PXote  the  irony  of  the  proem,  cf.  I  22,  23,  25,  and  the  bitterness,  c.  g.  of  ^  3, 
lu,  i:i,  -i. 

9  1 19,  20. 


The  Clever  Man. 


35 


Poor  he  is  and  needy,  for  his  father  left  him  nothing,^  the  support 
of  his  mother  had  devolved  upon  him,  and  his  business  brings  but 
scant  returns,  so  that  he  is  obliged  to  depend  on  the  pension  that 
the  state  grants  to  all  whose  yearly  income  is  less  than  three  minae 
(about  $50.00).  Furthermore,  he  is  well  along  in  years,^  and  of  a 
weak  bodily  constitution,  so  that  he  is  scarcely  able  to  attend  to  the 
duties  of  his  business,^  and  has  to  borrow  a  horse  for  a  journey  of 
any  length,''  and  requires  the  support  of  two  canes.^ 

The  salient  feature  of  the  Cripple's  character  is  cleverness,  which 
made  him  appear  sagacious,  and  tended  to  win  the  confidence  of  the 
audience  in  a  man  who  could  hardly  lay  claim  to  positive  virtues 
meriting  good-will.     He  is  clever  in  his  arguments,  using  them  so 
as  to  turn  attention  away  from  the  weak  points  of  his  case — for  we 
cannot  feel  that  he  is  altogether  worthy  or  needy.     He  fortifies  his 
statements  with  sarcastic  remarks  that  counteract  the  damaging 
testimony  of  his  accuser.    His  cleverness  is  also  evident  in  a  certain 
witty  drollness  of  humor,  that  appears  in  unexpected  turns  of  ex- 
pression, in  a  mock  pathos,  and  in  an  affected  imitation  of  the  lan- 
guage and  style  of  men  of  superior  culture  and  position,  with  whom 
the  Cripple  had  come  into  contact.^     This  last  fact  is  illustrated  in 
a  very  subtle  way,  by  the  use  of  a  somewhat  ornamental  and  elevated 
style,  that  cannot  but  sound  ridiculous  in  the  mouth  of  a  man  of  such 
humble  position.     In  fact  there  is  throughout  a  marked  contrast  of 
fine  language  and  elevated  form,  with  the  trifling  importance  of  the 
subject,  and  the  insignificance  of  the  interests  at  stake.    The  Cripple 
was  probably  one  of  those  original  characters  that  frequent  the 
public  places  of  a  city,  especially  after  the  social  upturning  of  a 
revolution,^  and  was  doubtlessly  well  known  to  the  senators,  who 
would  not  be  likely  to  refuse  a  mere  pittance  of  an  obol  a  day,  to  a 
man  who  was  on  tlie  wliole  harmless,  and  afforded  them  amusement 
in  their  leisure  hours.     Lysias  saw  the  humor  of  the  situation,  and 
wrote  for  his  client  the  speech  which  has  come  down  to  us,  and 
which  is  so  uniipie  in  literature  that  modern,  as  well  as  ancient 
critics,  would  have  it  that  it  is  not  genuine.    An  opinion  tliat  Blass 
does  not  support. 


M6.  ^^,,U.  3^.6.  -^no.  5pi, 

•  On  the  nature  and  value  of  cleverness  in  speaking,  cf  Aristotle's  Rhet.  III.  10. 


Cf.  k  25. 


'» 


ob 


Eihopoiia, 


AYe   shall    now  sec   that  in  thought,   language  and  synthesis^ 
this  speech   fulfils  the  conditions  reciuired  to  produce  cleverness 
and  .aiva-i  1  and  humor,  to  which,  in  this  case,  mock  pathos  and 
,,,.^^.^,,^^,„t.^l    i  niguage  contribute.     Cleverness  appears  particularly 
in    the   argument,    whose   all-pervading   note    is    sarcastic    irony. 
§   1-3  are  extremely  caustic,  closing  with   a  rlu^torical  question, 
whose  effect  is  heightened   by   homoioteleitta,  and   by  the  use  of 
the  future  indicative  with  el  in  the  protasis,  a  fbrm  of  condition 
commonly  employed  in  threatening  or  disagreeable  relations.     In 
§  i)  the  allusion  to  an  exchange  of  properties  is  the  means  of  a 
trinmphaiiL  proof  that  he  is  crippled  financially,  and  its  sarcastic 
humor  is  enhanced  by  the  emphatic  position  of  the  words,  and  by 
the  rhythmic  flow  of  the  clause  that  marks  the  climax  :  el  yap  iycb  | 
KaraaraOeU  \  xopvjo^  \  rpayMSol<;  | .'     Note  also  the  sting  involval 
in    the  hyperbole,   aa(j)eaTaTa  fiovo^i  dvdpoo'TTcov.     In   §   12,   by  a 
clever  redndio  ad  ahmrdum,  the  speaker  proves  the  weakness  of 
the  argument  that  he  is  not  crippled  physically,  and  the  references 
lu  die  two  Athenian  customs  regarding  heiresses  and  the  archon- 
^h\v  m  5  13,  14,  are  full  of  sarcasm  and  humor.     Note  the  em- 
phatic order  of  the  words  throughout  the  two  sections,  and  the  sting 
,.i   die  hyj/erbole  in  §  13,  tmv  dirdvrwv  dvOpcoircov.     The  attack  on 
his  eliaracter  he  cleverly  rebuts  by  arguing,  in  §  15-18,  that  his 
accuser  cannot  possibly  make  such  stiitements  in  earnest,  but  is 
i.  Ming.     In  ^  19,  20  we  have  the  neatest  piece  of  argumentation 
hi  dh     peech  ;  it  is  his  means  of  parrying  the  insinuations  as  to  the 
,^^•^y.^rU^v  of  Ids  shop.     avfiirXoKij  is  the  name  of  this  form  of  argu- 
ment,  whieli   is   recommended   by  the   rhetoricians,  who   likewise 
pmise  the  figure,  procatalepsi,^,  which  is  to  be  found  in  §  24,  25. 
By  a  series  of  rhetorical  cpiestions  and  tlieir  answers,  introduced  by 
TrSrepov  on  and  continued  by  aXV  on  in  the  (piestions,  and  by 
dW"  ovB'  in  the  answers,  the  cripple  in  a  fi'w  terse  sentences  effec- 
tnall      li  poses  of  all  the  arguments  that  he  can  imagine  will  be 
brougiiL  against   him.      Another  mark   of  the   speaker's   sarcastic 
cleverness   is  his   repetition   and   parodying  of  the  words   of  his 
oppriH  nt,  €.  ^.  §   5  T"r]V  6K  T7/9  rex^'V'^  eviropiav,  §   10  irepl  rrj<; 

^The  full-toned  form  Karaffrad^is  is  safely  read  only  here  in  Lysias.  Cj\ 
Frohberger,  ad  he.  It  seems  to  have  been  employed  in  this  place  for  rhythmic 
effect.     Cy.  Or.  21.  1,  Karaards  Krk. 


The  Clever  Man. 


37 


■e/X7}9  i7r7riKr)<;,  179  ovto<;  irokprjcre  pvqaOr/vaL  7rpo<;  vfjbd^,  §  11  hid 
rrjv  v^ptv,  ft)9  OL/T09  (f)r]o-i'i^,  §  18  irepl  rrj<;  ifjurj^  v/3pea)<;,  §  24  dX)C 
<jn  TToXvTTpdy/jLcop  elfjii  ktL  Note  how  he  harps  on  Xlav  in  §  15, 
16,  25.  This  rather  rare  adverb  undoubtedly  heightens  the  sar- 
casm,^ and  the  very  rare  7rpaovw<=;  in  §  15,  if  it  is  the  correct  read- 
ing, probably  has  the  same  effect.  The  fifteenth  section  is  in  fact 
the  crown  of  this  sarcastic  parodying  of  terms  and  the  proof  of  its 
ironical  intention.  In  §  18  note  the  gibe  at  his  accuser  in  the 
words  Mairep  n  koXov  itolmv.  Also  in  §  21  ri  hel  Trepl  tmv 
6fioLco<;  TovTcp  (f)av\cov  airovha^eiv,  where  a  play  is  made  upon  the 
double  meaning  of  (j)av\o^,  "  insignificant "  and  "  morally  Avorth- 
less."  Finally  the  very  last  words  of  the  speech,  i.  e.  §  27,  are  a 
fling  at  his  opponent. 

Furthermore,  in  the  construction  of  the  speech  signs  are  not  want- 
ing of  the  way  in  which  the  delivery  made  the  arguments  effective 
to  an  unusual  degree.  Note  for  instance  the  effect  produced  in  §  1 
by  a  pause  after  rj  and  before  (j)66vou,  used  irap'  virovocav  for  yfroyov, 
or  some  such  word.  Then  see  how  he  dwells  on  <^0ovo<;  in  the  fol- 
lowing sections,  and  observe  the  emphatic  position  of  ovro^  towards 
the  end  of  §  1 ,  the  order  of  the  words  in  the  first  sentence  of  §  9,  the 
position  o£  iyco  at  the  close  of  the  first  sentence  of  §  13,  the  hyper- 
baton  of  vixlv  in  §  21,  27.  These  are  only  instances  of  a  number  of 
eases.  In  §  6  pauses  at  the  proper  places  would  produce  a  striking 
effect.     For  observe : 

epol  yap  6  fxev  irarrfp  KarekiiTev  -  -  -  ovhev 

rrjv  Be  pr/repa  reXevTjjaacrav  -  -  -  ireiravpaL  Tpe<^wv  Kre, 

7ralBe<;  Be  /jlol  -  -  -  outto)  elalv  Kre. 

rexvrjV  Be  KeKTrjpai  -  -  -  jS'pax^a  Kre, 

Tov  BiaBe^ofjievov  8'  avTi]v  -  -  -  ovtto)  ktL 

TTpocroBof;  Be  pot  -  -  -  ov/c  eanv 

In  tlie  last  and  the  third  before  the  last  of  these  cases  the  hiatus 
distinctly  points  to  such  a  pause  as  I  have  indicated. 

^\iav  occurs  but  12  times  in  Lysias,  4  times  in  this  speech,  |  15,  16,  21,  25.  It 
occurs  but  once  in  Plato's  Republic  (549  d),  in  the  Gorgias  not  at  all,  in  Phaedrus 
once,  in  Protagoras  three  times.  Ast  quotes  but  13  exx.  for  Plato.  Very  rare  in 
Thuc,  Aesch.,  Soph.,  but  quite  frequent  in  Euripides.     It  connotes  excess. 


|i 


II 


O: 


s 


EthopoUa. 


The  Clever  Man. 


39 


-  jM 


'!  '■(  ■« 


\n  :i' 


[•\i   X 


)f  tliu  Lnpi>ic  admits  a  more  exact  division 
i'  thought,  language  and  synthesis.  As  for 
I  hnfi-Iii ,  !  ii.  re  is  a  real  wit  that  must  have  appeaknl  to  an  xVthen- 
MMiuiice,  in  many  of  the  allusions  already  mentioned  under 
^s.  Note  particularly  §  9,  12,  13,  14.  liumor  is  also  ap- 
pnieut  in  the  unexpected  substitution  of  (j)66vov  for  yjroyov  in  §  1, 
Ih  iMiv  itoi,  J,  and  11  §  6  the  play  of  thought  is  very  amusing,  as 
th  i-e  is  a  mock  ]^athos  contrasting  with  the  insignificance  of  the 
subject  The  climax  is  reached  at  the  end  of  the  section  with  the 
words  viro  rf/  hvcrx^peardTr)  rvxv^  ^^^  this  personification  of  Tvxv 
u\  ihii  use  of  vTTo  heightens  the  pathos.  Note  also  the  change  from 
the  anticipatory  form  of  condition  in  the  protasis  to  the  ideal  in  the 
:i}.  l,<;<.  Other  examples  of  this  mock  pathos  may  be  found  in 
§  7  .in,  22.  In  §  4,  5  note  the  play  upon  hvva^ai,  and  tlie  position 
of  hvva^evoL^  before  rather  than  after  avOpwiroi^,  where  it  naturally 
belongs.  The  contrast  of  serious  thought  and  insignificant  subject 
is  brought  out  at  the  end  of  §  7,  where  the  Cripple  hints  at  danger 
lii.n  !  1  IV  ensue  to  the  State  if  he  is  not  treated  justly.  The  same 
(jiicci  i.>  piudiKtd  by  the  use  of  commonplaces,  e.  fj.  in  §  3,  10,  15- 
18,  Hid  of  serious  conventional  phrases,  e.  g.  in  §  21,  and  of  ques- 
tion and  answer  in  §  23-25.  In  §  25  very  anuising  it  is  to  hear  the 
poor  and  Infirm  Cripple  defending  his  iniml)le  self  from  the  charge — 
imaginary  in  his  case — so  often  brought  in  those  days  against  men 
of  power  and  position,  namely,  that  he  had  taken  part  in  the  cruel- 
ties of  the  tvrannous  Thirty.  But  the  acme  of  all  this  seriousness 
of  expression,  ihis  mock  pathos,  this  ornamental  treatment  of  trivial 
nintters,  is  reached  in  §  26,  almost  at  the  close  of  the  speech.  For 
the  Cripple  states  that  his  plea  does  not  concern  the  financial  inter- 
ests oi  tlu'  state — no,  nor  the  administration  of  any  public  office, 
lui  merely  an  obol,  miserable  pittance  of  a  wretched  Cri})ple  ! 
1 !!  !  n  tlii^  wit  we  have  found  none  of  the  coarseness  that  some  critics 
aiVcct  to  see. 

Thr  language  of  the  Cripple  enhances  the  humor  of  the  speech  by 
ail  itV  !  hiess  thai  appears  in  w^ords  unusual  and  odd,  in  a  frequent 
use  ot  a  sententious  phraseology,  and  in  an  occasional  use  of  orna- 
ni!  liial  j'lL  liif'S.  In  treating  this  (juestion  it  must  be  borne  in  mind 
UKiL  L\  -ia-  pui\  A  [Lie  j_>ic  s  LiiL-  Uiu  introduction  of  any  very  strange 
,  x|,r.^<if,Ti-.  and  flu  rrfaro  we  cannot  expect  to  find  rare  words  in  this 


speech,  but  rather  w^ords  that  appear  unusual  and  out  of  their  sphere 
in  the  mouth  of  a  man  of  low  position.  The  following  words  may 
be  noted : 

§  3.    lao-dac.     A  proverbial  metaphor,  sententious  in  effect. 

§  6.    ScaSe^ofjLevov.     Technical,  not  belonging  to  popular  speech. 

§  7.    e\€7]/jLov6crTaTot.     Only  a  half-dozen  cases  in  classic  Greek. 

It  appears  to  have  been  called  into  use  here  as  a 
contrast  wdth  iXeeivo^;  below. 

§  7.    aOvfjurjaac.     Rare  and  affected,  belonging  to  the  elevated  style. 

Possibly  used  here  for  assonance  wdth  ahturjcrai. 

§  10.    (f)Lko(TO(f)elv,     Means  here  "  to  study."  Savors  of  the  language 

of  the  educated.      Cf.  Jebb,  Attic  Orators,  11.  36. 

§  10.    ^i]T€Lv.     Same  effect  as  last  named. 

§  15.    Xlav.     Contributes  to  sarcasm.      CJ.  p.  37,  note. 

§  15.    irpaovm.     Very  rare,  if  indeed  it  is  the  correct  reading  for 

TTpdco^.  The  authorities  quote  only  two  other  in- 
stances, from  Aristophanes  and  Aelianus. 

It  is,  however,  in  the  phraseology  that  the  largest  number  of 
opportunities  are  open  for  affectedness.  §  3.  Note  the  combination 
of  full  sounding  and  elevated  terms  in  the  sententious  phrase  ol/xai 
Betv  fcre.  The  balancal  construction  enhances  the  sententiousness. 
§  6.  i^Lgal  phraseology  is  employed :  i/jbol  yap  6  fiev  irarrip  nare- 
\L7rev  KT€.  Here  ornamentation  is  apparent  in  the  alliteration  in  r  : 
Tpe(j)(ov  rpiTov  €to<;  tovtL  §  7  The  combination  of  pairs  in  the 
full  form  of  the  comparative  lends  a  swing  to  these  sententious 
antithetical  sentences.  §  9.  The  rhythm  of  the  sentence  el  yap  iyo) 
ktL  has  been  noticed.  §  10.  The  sententious  thought  is  colored  by 
fine  writing  and  the  combination  of  full-toned  and  affected  terms. 
§  15-18.  Repeated  instances  of  the  combination  of  fine  terms.  §  23. 
Note  the  full  tone  given  by  the  use  of  superlatives.  §  24.  In  aXX' 
ou  TotavTac<;  Kri.  we  find  a  pompous  statement  of  the  fact  that  he 
is  not  so  bad  as  he  is  represented.  The  ornateness  and  consequent 
affectedness  of  the  speech  is  heightened  by  the  use  of  pairs,  and  even 
of  triplets.  Cf.  §  7,  8,  10,  15,  19,  20,  22,  23,  24,  25.  In  the  use 
of  figures  of  speech  we  may  note  only  the  combined  use  ofhypophora 
and  epanaphora  in  §  23-25,  comparing  §  15,  16.     These  add  to  the 


K 


Ethopoua. 


ui  iuiiii'jiiiaiiuu  of  the  speech,  and  render  the  speaker^s  statement  clear 
aivl  rmnhatlc  as  well. 

liKit  the  syntliesis  of  this  speech  is  aifected  is  apparent  through- 
out. ( )!'  hiatus  there  is  a  certain  avoidance,  for  there  is  but  1  case 
m  cacii  12.3  lines.  This  is  si)ecially  marked  when  we  compare  such 
MF  itions  as  1,  3,  4,  5,  19,  23,  26,  27,  whose  average  is  1  case  in  3.6 
1  ii  >s  Teubner.  The  construction  of  the  sentence,  wliich  is  on  the 
\\liole  simple  and  unconstrainwl,  is  often  ornamental  however, 
especially  in  the  use  of  balanced  antitheses.  Antitheses  are  note- 
worthy in  §  1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6,  7,  12,  13,  16,  17,  18,  20,  22,  25,  27. 
I  n  ^  15-18  there  is  a  succession  of  antitheses  long  drawn  out.  Cf. 
§  8.  1  lie  balance  is  particularly  noticeable  in  §  2,  13.  At  the  end 
of  §  1<S  the  word  PovXofievo^  is  repeated  for  the  express  purpose  of 
preserving  the  balance  of  the  clauses,  as  the  syntax  and  the  sense 
<!  not  require  its  repetition.  In  several  cases  these  balanced  anti- 
theses receive  further  ornament  from  the  use  of  homoioteleuta.  Cf. 
§  3,  7  bis,  20,  23.  In  §  7  ahiKr^aaL  and  dOvfirjaai  are  cases  of  con- 
trasted assonance.  As  for  the  order  of  words  in  the  clause,  it  is 
natural  or  emphatic  with  occasional  exceptions,  e.  g.  ^  6  yeviaOaCy 
§  i'.*  wv  e/xe,  §  21,  27  vfilv. 

Pnif  mating  with  the  Cripple  is  the  plaintiff  of  Or.  10.  Alike  in 
ti,  ir  sense  of  humor,  they  differ  in  that  one  displays  the  ready  wit 
of  the  low  born,  the  other  the  sarcastic  humor  of  indignant  high 
spit  ii.  Alike  in  their  earnest  pleading  of  an  insignificant  case,  they 
(liW'-'V  m  tiuit  the  Cripple  is  urged  on  because  his  bodily  sustenance 
is  endangered,  the  speaker  of  this  oration,  because  his  honor  is  at 
stake.  Again,  they  are  both  rhetorical,  but  with  one  it  is  the  affecta- 
iioii  oi  the  low  born,  with  the  other  it  is  the  vigorous  and  indignant 
1:Higuage  of  a  rnnn  of  liigh  spirit.  And  this  is  the  broad  line  of  the 
*1  ilerence,  one  is  cringing,  the  other  disdainful,  high  spirited. 

This  high  spirit  is  shown  by  his  disregard  of  petty  things,^  and 
\ri  i!i  this  case  he  cannot  brook  animadversions  on  his  character, 
even  w  lieu  spoken  in  wrath  and  haste.  Furthermore,  although  the 
jii-tice  of  his  case  is  self-evident,  still  he  will  leave  no  stone  un- 
UiiiiLd  ill  lii-  attack,  and  subjects  Theomnestus'  arguments  to  a  fire 
of  criticisii!  :uu\  vhVumh  that  left  him  absolutely  no  ground  to  stand 


The  Clever  Man. 


41 


upon.  His  instructing  "  stupid  "  ^  Theomnestus  in  the  interpretation 
of  the  laws  is  to  be  noted,  and  also  his  boldness  in  not  sparing  even 
the  judges  themselves.^  He  is  not  afraid  to  express  his  admiration 
for  the  condemned  Dionvsius,^  and  his  devotion  to  his  father  arouses 
in  him  a  spirit  that  evokes  vigorous  and  often  indignant  language. 
The  elevation  of  language  noticeable  especially  in  §  21-32  is,  then, 
a  marked  characteristic  of  his  high  spirit.  Note  the  avoidance  of 
hiatus,  1  case  in  each  21  lines  of  §  21-32,  1  case  in  each  3  lines  §  1- 
21,  1  case  in  each  7  lines  being  the  Lysianic  norm.  A  few  rhetori- 
cal figures  heighten  the  effect,  especially  the  hypophora  in  §  23,^  the 
proeatelepsis  in  §  6,  30,  alliteration  in  §  27,  31,  many  rhetorical 
questions,  and  apostrophes  to  the  judges  and  to  Theomnestus. 
Also  the  effect  of  elevation  is  enhanced  by  such  unusual  words  as 
vTTO'xeipiO'^,  §  27  ]  aviapo^,  §  28,  and  expressions  as  in  §  21,  26,  29, 
add  to  the  force  of  his  statements.  The  high  spirit  of  the  speaker 
is  specially  noticeable  in  his  sarcastic  and  often  contemptuous 
humor,  and  he  displays  the  greatest  ease  in  making  Theomnestus 
ridiculous.  His  interpretation  of  obsolete  words  in  the  laws  was 
calculated  to  amuse  his  audience.  In  the  AatraXet?,  a  fragment 
of  Aristophanes,  a  father  amusingly  examines  his  son  on  the  hard 
words  in  Homer,  and  the  son  retorts  by  questioning  his  father  on 
the  archaic  words  in  Solon's  laws.  This  proves  such  an  exami- 
nation a  recognized  means  of  amusing  Athenians.  But  in  this 
case  more  than  that  was  accomplished, — Theomnestus  was  made 
absurd.  Bitter  sarcasm  is  likewise  apparent  in  §  9,  23,  and  anti- 
theses oflen  give  point  to  the  caustic  language.  Hyperbole  is  used 
with  effect  in  §  3,  asyndeton,  a'xehov,  not  aj(ehov  yap,  in  §  5,  an 
articular  infinitive  in  §  12,  and  ironical  expressions  in  §  9  bis,  14, 
15,  24,  29, — all  are  used  with  effect.  In  §  30  the  argument  is 
humorous,  the  reference  to  the  judges,  bold,  as  we  have  seen.  In 
§  20  crcSrjpov^;  is  a  popular  metaphor  of  a  kind  rare  outside  of 
Demosthenes,  Aeschines  and  Deinarchus,  and  very  sarcastic. 

Like  this  speaker  and  the  Cripple  the  public  prosecutor  of  Or.  30 
rests  the  force  of  his  arguments  largely  on  sarcasm,  e.  g.  ^  2  dvrl 

/JL€V  XoXftiVQii  avTov  vofioOeTTjv  KarecTTrjcrev,  §  7  on jevrjaovrai, 

and  §  26,  27.     The  sarcasm  is  heightened  by  the  usual  feature  of 


^  (TKUlSs  ^15. 

*  Cf.  Or.  24  ^  24,  25. 


« I  3,  24,  30. 


3 1  24-26. 


If! 


i:. 


Ethopoiia, 


The  Immoral  Man, 


43 


speeches  in  public  prosecutions,  the  rhetorical  figures  of  thought, 
e.  g,  apo4opeds,  §  2 ;  exaggeratio,  §  3,  4,  et  mult.  al. ;  procata- 
lepsh,  §  7  ;  hijpophora,  §  26,  27.  To  this  effect  also  contril)ute 
fr(M|ii('nt  antitheses,  e.  g,,  §  16,  27;  paronomasia,  §  21,  29,  30; 
honioiotelenta,  §  21,  31  ;  and  bold  compounds,  §  22  -jrepiKarap- 
peovra,  aw.  elp.,  and  §  35  /jLLao7rovr]pelv. 

The  Man  of  Low  Birth. 

The  orations  of  Lysias  are  not  without  other  examples  of  low 
born  adventurers  like  the  Cripi)le,  though  none  of  the  others  are 
delineated  with  anything  like  the  same  detail.  Agoratus,  the  de- 
fendant of  Oi\  13^  was  the  son  of  a  slave  and  gained  the  rights  of 
citizenshii)  in  a  "  shady  "  sort  of  way.  He  was  an  "  informer"  by 
profession,  and  he  was  a  party  to  many  political  jobs.  One  of  these 
resulted  in  the  judicial  murder  of  a  number  of  citizens,  and  was  the 
cause  of  this  suit.  Another  man  raised  from  slavery  to  citizenship 
was  Nicomachus,  the  copyist  of  Or.  30,  who  liad  accpiired  such 
familiarity  witli  the  law  s  that  he  was  one  of  those  entrusted  with 
their  revision,  but  failed  to  comply  with  the  statute  limitations,  and 
so  got  into  trouble.  This  bold  fellow,  tlie  prosecutor  dec^lares,  actu- 
ally liad  the  audacity  to  set  himself  up  as  law-maker  in  Sohjn's 
stead  !^  Au  adventurer  of  low  order  we  also  find  in  l^mcleon  of 
Or.  23,  who  was  a  mere  runaway  slave  according  to  the  plaintiff. 
But  the  most  infamous  of  all  the  cliaracters  ])ortraved  bv  Lysias  is 
Eratosthenes  of  Or.  1,  whom  we  may  study  as  a  type  of  the  im- 
moral man. 

The  Immoral  Man. 

Eratosthenes  of  Oie  was  a  vouno:  Athenian  hardly  come  to  man's 
estate,^  yet  already  familiar  with  the  evil  ways  of  the  world.  For 
he  not  only  had  a  mistress,  but  had  made  it  his  profession  to  debauch 
women.^  When  once  he  had  seen  a  woman  that  took  his  fancy  he 
knew  how  to  take  prompt  and  effective  measures  to  secure  his  ends. 
For  i  japliiletus'  wife  he  saw  at  her  mother-in-law's  funeral,  and  by 
means  of  tlie  maid-servant,  whose  services  he  probably  obtained  by 
means  of  a  bribe,  he  soon  had  access  to  her  for  his  own  evil  pur- 


*  Cf.  Or.  30  ^  2. 


*  ^  37,  vcaviaKOS. 


U6. 


poses.  Euphiletus  refers  to  him  contemptuously  throughout.  In 
§8,  11,  45,  dvdpooiro'i  is  the  term  he  finds  most  fit  for  him,  while 
eKelvo^,  "  that  notorious  wretch,"  is  the  term  he  applies  to  him  in 
§  15,  25,  27,  29,  38.  veaviaKo^  is  the  word  he  uses  as  describing 
him  in  §  37, — in  scorn,  for  it  is  a  word  that  appears  to  have  been 
used  properly  of  half  grown  boys.^  Eratosthenes  must  have  been 
decidedly  more  than  a  half  grown  boy  to  have  had  opportunity  to 
debauch  a  number  of  women,  and  thus  become  a  roue  by  profession. 
In  this  same  section,  37,  Euphiletus  speaks  of  him  as  rov  rrjv  yvvalKa 
rrjv  ipt]v  8ta(j)6€ipavTa,  another  mark  of  his  contempt.  The  old 
hag  does  not  appear  to  have  shared  this  contempt,  but  merely  hated 
him,  for  she  terms  him  6  dv/jp,^  which  may,  perhaps,  be  rendered 
"  the  gentleman." 

We  may  further  note  that  Eratosthenes  was  .not  without  his 
share  of  that  fickleness  common  among  characters  of  his  type. 
For  he  had  abandoned  his  mistress  for  his  new  "  flame,"  the  wife 
of  Euphiletus,  and  he  had  had  amours  with  many  womcn.^  A 
craven,  too,  he  was,  and  did  not  pretend  to  make  any  defence ;  as 
indeed  how  could  he,  seeing  that  he  was  caught  in  the  very  act? 
When  Euphiletus  knocked  him  down,  bound  his  hands  behind  his 
back,  and  asked  him  what  he  meant  by  his  outrageous  conduct,  he 
ackno^^•ledged  his  wrong  deed,  and  besought  and  entreated  him  to 
spare  his  life  and  accept  a  compensation  in  money.^  He  is  accord- 
ingly the  typical  rake  familiar  to  us  in  the  plays  of  Plautus  and 
Terence. 

A  man  of  like  passions,  but  of  a  different  type,  is  the  speaker  of 
Or.  3,  who  indulges  himself  in  the  privacy  of  his  own  home,  and 
dislikes^  troubling  the  public  with  his  private  peccadillos,  which 
he  considers  entirely  his  own  affair  so  long  as  others  do  not  suffer 
from  them.  He  regrets  that  he  is  now  obliged  to  force  his  habits 
upon  public  notice,  but  being  obliged,  he  is  perfectly  frank,^  with- 
out being  disgustingly  particular  in  the  detailed  narration  of  his 
affairs.  It  is  quite  true,  he  ackno^vledges,  that  he  was  possessed  of 
a  passion  for  the  youth,  and  that  such  feelings  do  not  befit  his 
years,'^  but  he  is  guiltless  of  the  charge  brought  against  him  by 


^  Cf.  Liddell  and  Scott,  sub  voce. 
*  I  25. 


'§16. 


^ibid. 

^Ibid.    Cf.  ^  10. 


44 


Ethopoiia. 


Simon.  It  was,  too,  his  anxiety  to  avoid  public  scandal  that  led 
him  to  leave  the  city,  and  tliough  injured  and  wronged,  he  kejit 
quiet.^  11ie  speech  is  quiet  and  dignified,  as  befits  a  man  no  longer 
young,^  and  of  some  wealth  and  good  family  position.^  It  is  plain 
that  he  has  no  elevated  moral  ideals,  and  in  language  and  thouglit 
he  does  not  depart  from  the  norm.  His  arguments  in  defence  of 
his  habits  are  the  (commonplace  ones.'*  The  style  is  rather  more 
periodic  than  usual,^  which  is  suited  to  the  dignified  character  of 
the  speaker.  To  the  weiglit  and  dignity  of  the  speech  also  con- 
tribute a  number  of  pairs  unusually  large  for  Lysias,  IG  in  all.^ 
Figures  are  not  conspicuous,  nor  is  there  any  humor,  thougli  this 
1=^  n  distinctive  trait  of  Lysias.  There  is  however  a  slight  irony 
in  §  28  TovTo  ianv  rj  irpovota,  and  sarcasm  in  §  44  ipav  re  kuI 

aVKO(j)dvT€CV. 

The  speaker  of  Or.  4  got  into  trouble  about  a  slave  girl,  for  whom 
he  had  a  passion,  and  not  a  youth,  as  in  the  last  case.  The  speech 
is  too  fragmentary  to  allow  us  to  draw  any  conchisions  as  to  ethos. 
We  may  note  however  that  the  style  is  natural,  and  that  more  live- 
liness and  vigor  is  displayed  than  in  Or.  3 ;  as  instances  of  this 
vigor  observe  the  brief,  forcible  sentences  of  §  5,  and  the  compounds 
of  §  8,  9,  Sv(T€pcoi;,  o^vx^ipf  Trdpoivoi;,  /BapuBacfjLovia.  The  natural 
simplicity  of  the  speech  is  shown  by  the  absence  of  rhetorical  figures, 
and  by  only  a  few  cases  of  the  most  inevitable  ornamental  figures, 
and  by  an  easy  structure  of  the  sentences.  Tlie  proportion  of  com- 
bined periods  to  the  total  number  of  rhythmic  periods  is  but  as  4  to  24. 

The  characters  of  the  Lysianic  fragment  75,  quoted  by  Dionysius, 
and  especially  Tisis  and  Pytheas,  move  in  the  same  sphere  of  society 
as  those  in  Or.  3,  4.  The  rows  described  in  all  three  of  these  ora- 
tions are  certainly  of  a  very  lively  nature. 

The  Young  Man. 

We  saw  that  the  speaker  of  Or.  19  betrayed  the  modesty  of  youth, 
and  based  his  claims  ratlier  upon  the  merits  of  his  father  and  brother- 

icy.  §10, 30.  ^Cf.l^'  'H7.  ♦^.^.  H. 

^Outside  of  the  proem,  which  shows  the  usual  care  in  sentence  structure,  there 
are  11  combined  periods  in  a  total  of  46  rhytlimic  periods  in  this  oration. 
Hn  §1,  2,  3,  5,  7,  17  his,  26,  29,  37,  39  his,  42,  43,  45  his. 


The  Young  Man, 


45 


in-law  than  upon  his  own.  Similarly  the  speaker  of  Or.  18  is  too 
young  ^  to  have  done  any  great  deeds,  to  have  developed  any  promi- 
nent individual  traits.  So  he  dwells  on  the  deeds  of  his  familv,^  and 
such  personal  ethos  as  appears  in  only  that  of  youth.  We  note  this 
in  his  pathetic  expression  of  his  thought/  liveliness,  warmth  of  feel- 
ing, elevation,^  family  pride,  occasional  humble  tone,^  repetitions, 
lack  of  brevity.^  In  his  synthesis  it  appears  in  a  use  of  ornamental 
figures  including  homoioteleuton^  balance,  antithesis ,  and  of  a  some- 
what artistic  method  in  the  structure  of  his  periods.^  There  are, 
liowever,  none  of  those  rhetorical  figures  that  lend  ornament  to  the 
thought,  which  is  plain  and  direct  like  the  language,  though  this 
last  is  not  without  a  few  rare  words  and  phrases  ^  that  are  to  be  ex- 
pected in  young  men.  Avoidance  of  hiatus  ^^  in  this  speech  gives  an 
earnest,  terse  effect,  as  in  the  case  of  the  young  Mautitheus  of  Or. 
16.  In  a  certain  lack  of  invention  and  in  a  simple  arrangement  the 
inexperience  of  youth  again  appears.  The  real  effectiveness  of  the 
speech  is  due  indeed  to  this  seeming  lack  of  SetvoTTjf;,  which  appeals 
to  that  sympathy  that  it  is  the  speaker's  object  to  evoke.  And  so 
through  all  the  speech  Lysias  has  given  him  the  characteristics  of 
inexperienced  youth. 

We  might  naturally  expect  to  find  resemblances  here  to  Aristotle's 
description  of  the  characteristics  of  youth  in  his  Rhetoric^  II.  12. 
But  he  dwells  mainly  on  the  weaknesses  of  youth,  which  the  orator 
of  course  withholds  from  view.  There  are  some  similar  traits 
however,  and,  naturally  enough,  there  are  striking  correspondences 
with  the  traits  of  that  profligate  young  man,  Eratosthenes  of  Oie. 

1^0,21;  c/.  Jebb,  231.  *§2ff. 

3 This  speech  is  "emphatically  an  appeal  to  pity,"  says  Mr.  Jebb,  p.  232;  as 
instances  note  I  10,  21-23,  25-27,  which  also  show  liveliness  and  warm  feeling. 

*E.  y.,  in  g  2-8,  his  glorification  of  his  family,  which  is  expressed  in  ample, 
flowing  terms. 

5  g  17,  20 ;  c/.  Blass,  529,  ad  fin. 

^Cj.  II  S}v  Trpoar)KOVT€S  /ere.,  with  §  21  Kal  twv  irpoyovwu  Krk.,  and  with  ^  24  r&v 
yap  Trpoo-TjKSvTCtiV  Krk.,  and  c/".  ^  8  Kairoi  rivfs  Krk,  with  1 12  Kalroi  deiuSy,  kt€. 

'  As  examples  of  these,  ^  2,  7,  15,  18,  19,  20,  21. 

^  There  are  11  combined  periods  in  a  total  of  31  rhythmic  periods. 

^07  €K  roov  ouTccv  eKTriTTTwo-t,  I  19  ixv7]<nKaKi7v,  and  opyris  oUaris  Trpo<T<pdrov,  ^  25 
(priixias  rr)S  r]/j.€T^pas. 

^°1  case  in  17.5  lines. 


46 


Ethopoiia, 


The  Women  of  Lysias. 

Lysias  has  not  left  us  without  typical  women  as  well  as  men. 
Or.  1,  which  has  already  given  us  the  stock  characters  of  the  new 
comedy,  the  injured  husband  and  the  rake,  also  supplies  a  life- 
like picture  of  an  unfaithful  wife  and  of  the  servile  maid  servant, 
together  with  the  conventional  meretrixj  and  her  old  hag  of  a  slave 
woman,  and,  as  the  special  property  of  this  piece,  a  genuine  bawd- 
ing  baby.*  His  ^vife  Euplilletus  describes  as  having  been,  in  the 
early  days  of  their  married  life,  a  good  housekeeper,  a  thrifty  and 
careful  manager,  in  short  the  l>est  of  women,^  and  the  most  faithful 
wife  in  Athens.^  She  does  not  seem,  liowever,  to  have  had  much 
moral  strength,  for  she  appears  to  have  given  way  easily  to  the 
blandishments  of  Eratosthenes.'*  A  woman  of  humble  position, 
she  was  probably  flattered  by  the  attentions  of  sucli  a  polite  man 
about  town,  and  like  so  many  weak  and  silly  w^omen,  she  yielded 
to  temptation.  She  appears  also  to  have  been  devoid  of  nuich 
natural  affection.  Not  to  mention  her  willingness  to  bring  dis- 
grace on  husband  and  child,  we  have  it  recorded  that  she  did  not 
observe  the  conventional  period  of  mourning  for  her  brother.* 
And  surelv  no  true  mother  would  have  had  her  helpless  little  baby 
fretted,  pinched,  perhaps,  by  the  servant  girl,  in  order  that  she 
might  [)ursue  her  forbidden  pleasures  undisturbed.^  Cunning  she 
was  too,  and  fertile  in  resource.  Her  husl)aud  she  kept  in  the 
mn-{  piofoiuid  and  unsus})ecting  ignorance  of  her  guilt  even  after 
it  had  become  public  property ;  ^  and,  as  we  have  seen,  she  cleverly 
pressed  the  baby's  crying  into  service  at  an  opportune  moment, 
and  had  ready  replies  for  inconvenient  remarks.  And  thus  with 
a  few  strokes  Lysias  drew  a  complete  })icture  of  a  weak,  cunning 
woman. 

Tlie  servant  girl  of  this  same  speech,  a  maid  of  all  work,  wait- 
ing on  the  table,^  g^^^g  to  market,^  or  tending  the  baby  *^  as  occa- 
sion  Jtiiiuiided,   is  typical  of  her  class  in   lier  servility,  and   is 

^  Sex  not  indicated.  «  g  7.  »  ^0. 

^  I  15.    Cf.  Mnesilochus'  account  of  the  frailties  of  women,  Ar.  Thesmophor. 
477  ff. 

8  Cf.  Frohb.  on  I  IQ.  » g  8,  16.  ^^  ^  11. 


The  Women  of  Lysias. 


47 


remarkably  accommodating  to  those  that  require  her  services. 
Eratosthenes  readily  makes  use  of  her  to  gain  access  to  her  mis- 
tress, she  takes  care  that  the  babv  shall  crv  so  as  to  conceal  her 
mistress'  escapades,*  and  if  we  are  to  take  the  words  of  her  mistress 
in  earnest  in  §  13,  she  seems  to  have  been  the  occasion  of  some 
peccadillos  on  the  part  of  Euphiletus  himself  \Yhen  later  he 
learned  tliat  she  knew  about  his  wife's  conduct  and  threatened  her 
with  condign  punishment  unless  she  told  him  the  whole  truth,  she 
w^as  at  first  true  to  her  mistress,  and  declared  she  knew  nothing. 
But  when  Eratosthenes  was  mentioned  she  was  entirelv  overcome, 
and  fell  at  Euphiletus'  knees,  obtained  a  pledge  from  him  that  she 
should  not  be  punished,  and  told  liini  the  whole  story.^  From  this 
time  she  was  servilely  obedient  to  her  master,  dreading  what  would 
befall  her  if  she  dared  disobev.  In  accordance  with  his  commands 
she  kept  the  whole  matter  secret,  and  wlien  Eratosthenes  again 
came  to  the  house,  promptly  informed  her  master.  When  he  placed 
her  in  charge  of  the  door  while  he  went  out  for  his  neighbors,  faith- 
fully she  performed  her  duty,  and  did  not  give,  as  she  might  easily 
have  done,  warning  to  Eratosthenes  so  that  he  could  escape.^  With 
this  incident  her  connection  with  the  story  is  ended. 

There  is  little  to  be  said  about  the  old  hag,  irpeo-^vn^  dv6 p  cotton , 
sent  by  her  mistress  to  disclose  Eratosthenes'  true  character  to  Eu- 
pliiletus.  She  speaks  briefly  and  to  the  point,  and  then  leaves. 
She  shows  herself  a  good  servant  in  that  she  shares  her  mistress' 
hatred  for  Eratosthenes,  as  becomes  a  faithful  slave.^  The  meretrix 
does  not  herself  appear  upon  the  scene,  but  is  represented  by  her 
servant.  Pier  motives  for  undeceiving  Euphiletus  were  not  of  the 
loftiest,  but  thev  were  most  natural.  The  discarded  mistress  is 
angered  at  the  desertion  of  her  paramour  to  another  and  probably 
younger  woman,  and  takes  the  most  effective  means  within  her 
reach  for  securing  her  revenge. 

Afler  these  unsavory  characters  glad  are  we  to  make  the  acquain- 
tance of  the  only  other  woman  known  to  us  through  Lysias,  the 
mother  in  Or.  32.  In  her  devotion  to  her  children  the  good  woman 
overcomes  her  repugnance  of  appearing  before  the  court  of  the 


*  Cf.  Frohb.  on  §  16. 


§  18-20. 


§23. 


I.Q 


Ethopoiia. 


men  of  her  family/  and  brings  charges  against  her  own  father,  that 
heartless  Diogeiton.^  Though  she  speaks  of  her  stepmother's  chil- 
dren growing  up  in  affluence  while  her  own  are  in  want,  yet  she 
shows  no  petty  feeling.^  A\^omanly  pathos  *  she  displays,  however, 
and  in  a  most  natural  way,  lielghtentKl  by  a  few  figures^  and 
pointed  by  references  to  the  gods.^  In  her  language  Lysias  has 
taken  care  to  give  that  staccato  effect,  that  Bpcfivrrj^;,  which  is 
characteristic  of  woman's  speech/  As  marks  of  this,  note  the  large 
preponderance  of  finite  verbs  in  her  speech,^  the  asyndeton  in  §  16, 
the  [jolysi/ndeton  in  §  17.  Another  mark  of  the  speech  of  women, 
the  conservators  of  old,  familiar  usages  in  language,  is  OeXco  for 
ideXoo  in  §  L3.     Compare  i)age  o2  of  this  dissertation. 

It  is  pleasant  to  end  ^vith  the  contemplation  of  the  character  of 
such  a  true  woman  a  study  that  began  with  that  noble  Athenian, 
Mantitheus. 


*  Cf.  Frohb.  on  §  11.     It  was  not  considered  proper  for  a  woman  to  speak 
publicly  before  men. 


H7. 


«§  12-17. 

^ E.g.  epanaphora  in  ^  16,  17. 

^  Cf.  Prof.  Gildersleeve  in  Amer.  Jm.  Phil.  IX.  151. 


*E.g.  ?16. 
'§13,17. 
8  Ibid.  144. 


Y 


'/''  'V-''- 


'»     »■" 


'.  --     'Ti  V  -     \ 


-t.::^ . 


-:^yY  yfl'j^l^. 


h.. 


'■^  COI.UMB  i    UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 


y  > 


01065 


>.  ^-^xK^e 


c 


/'h 


koii^" 


'    -V). 


-V'. 


'O. 


t^ 


It  \     I 


\i 


/.-  4-.^  ^7>v> -z_^--'^J^- 


•Av«' 


\  \ 


w< 


\ 


;>-^ 


\f 


■A  < 
\ »    - 


^rC 


>^7,- 


'■/-=':^>' 


..,^; 


\ .)'/. 


•>  /^ 


'' 4(>l$"it^'' 


'VK- 


^- 


§ 


00  o 


/" 


^^ 


'^j'.l'^  .   -^6^ 


^\ 


5824 


^;" 


^Vr: 


^x 


<:\^i,  >■»- 


n 


>_ 


>!,^ 


»'"?-4-J. 


m 


^•tteni.^^. 


i(v^->' 


#s; 


L?*! 


#r 


K'X.  cl. 


[  "^^ 


mi'} 


sv'mf- 


■^ 


^^W  ( 


